
Class _X_i3^ 
Book ^_^ 



GofiyrigkN^. 



COFnUCKT DIPOSm 



IPubUcattond 



J£3 

'2.1 n 



OP THE 



■JUniversitig of ipenns^elvanta 



SERIES IN 

HISTORY 



IsTO. *1 



THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT 
IN PENNSYLVANIA 

1 760- 1 776 

BY 

Charles H. Lincoln 

Sometime Senior Fellow in American History -dn .the. 
University of Pennsylvania . ',1 „ 



Published for the University 

PHILADELPHIA 

1901 
GiNN & Co., Selling Agents, Tremont Place, Boston, Mass. 



-IBHARY C? 

•JGRESS. 



1^ COPY B. 



Copyright, 1901, by 
Charles H. Lincoln. 



PREFACE. 

This study is the result of work done while the author was 
senior fellow in American history at the University of Penn- 
sylvania. The opinions formed at that time have been changed 
in some instances by the use of material found in the Library 
of Congress, and it is hoped that the conclusions reached may 
be of interest to students of the American revolution. 

No attempt has been made to write a history of Pennsyl- 
vania. Only such facts and tendencies in her provincial life 
have been pictured as serve to make clear the foundation and 
growth of the revolutionary movement within that State. 
Much less has there been any desire to enter the broader field 
of the conflict between Great Britain and her colonies in 
America. The movement within the State and the move- 
ment within the nation were closely connected, but an effort 
has been made to introduce no phase of the broader struggle 
except such as excited particular interest in Pennsylvania. 
For this reason the press and pamphlet utterances of revolu- 
tionary leaders have been cited only when they found expres- 
sion in Pennsylvania newspapers or were freely circulated 
within that colony. 

Pennsylvania was a miniature picture of the British Empire. 
The same differences of race, religion and economic interest 
which divided the empire into two nations, were prominent in 
the Quaker colony. This study is an effort to set forth the 
extent of those differences, to trace the development of a 
revolutionary party within the colony, and to picture the cir- 
cumstances attendant upon the final conflict between the radi- 
cal and conservative forces in 1776. In this way only can 
the attitude of Pennsylvania during the international struggle 
be understood. The leaders of the revolution in the Quaker . 
colony were more eager to obtain independence within their 

(3) 



4 Preface. 

own State than to throw off the British connection. The 
national movement furnished the opportunity for which the 
dissatisfied people throughout the province had been waiting, 
and the result was a double change of government. Errors, 
both of fact and of judgment, have undoubtedly crept into 
this study, and for these the indulgence of the reader is asked. 
The purpose of the work has been to show the interdepen- 
dence of the colonial and national revolutions, and if this has 
been done the author is content. 

A short list of references will be found in a note at the 
beginning of each chapter, and a somewhat more comprehen- 
sive list of the authorities upon which reliance has been 
placed is given in an appendix. The author wishes to thank 
Professors John Bach McMaster and Herman V. Ames, of 
the University of Pennsylvania, and Mr. John W. Jordan, of 
the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Each of these gen- 
tlemen has saved him from many errors, and has been an 
inspiration and a help to him in his work. Finally, acknowledg- 
ment is gratefully made to Provost Charles C. Harrison, of 
the University of Pennsylvania, who alone made this study 
possible. 

C. H. Lincoln. 

Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. , 
May I, igoi. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

Chapter. Page 

I. The Foundation of the Revolutionary Movement 7 

II. The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration 23 

III. The Pennsylvania Assembly Under the Colonial Government ... 40 

IV. The Growth of the Revolution in the West 53 

V. The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia 77 

VI. The Opening of the Conflict 97 

VII. The Introduction of International Questions . . , 114 

VIII. The Argument of Remonstrance 136 

IX. The Law and the Constitution 151 

X. The Alignment of Parties 167 

XI. The Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization 189 

XII. The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement 215 

XIII. The Fall of the Quaker Government 233 

XIV. The New Government Assumes Legal Form 266 

Appendix — List of Authorities 288 

Index 293 



(5) 



CHAPTER I. 
The Foundation of the Revolutionary Movement. 



Authorities. 

The history of the Friends in Pennsylvania has been considered so frequently 
as synonymous with the history of the province that nearly all the authorities 
given in the appendix will be found helpful in connection with this chapter. 
Especial attention may be called to the Penn manuscripts in the library of the 
Historical Society of Pennsylvania and in Washington, the Memoirs of that His- 
torical Society, the Philadelphia colonial press and the Shippen Papers [Thomas 
Balch, Philadelphia, 1855]. 

The best secondary accounts of the Quaker government are in Shepherd : 
History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania [Columbia University Studies, 
Vol. 6, 1896]. Sharpless: A Quaker Experiment in Government [Philadelphia, 
1897].' Gordon: History of Pennsylvania [Philadelphia, 1829], and in those 
portions of Greene: The Provincial Governor [Harvard Historical Studies, Vol. 
7, 1898], which deal with Pennsylvania. It is impossible to really understand 
Pennsylvania history, however, without reading the controversial literature of the 
period, especially the press and pamphlet arguments, and this remark holds true 
for the subjects discussed in succeeding chapters. The chief newspapers are 
mentioned in the appendix and a good list of the provincial pamphlets is given 
in Hildeburn : Issues of the Pennsylvania Press. 

It is beginning to be recognized, even by those who have 
not speciahzed in colonial history, that taxation without rep- 
resentation was not the cause of the American revolution. It 
was only an effective cry by which the forces hostile to Great 
Britain might be united. Much nearer the truth is the state- 
ment that a separate people came to America in the seven- 
teenth century and that early divisions were intensified by the 
successive waves of immigration which characterized the 
colonial period and were fostered by the utterly dissimilar 
environments of England and America. Every advance in 
the development of law and theology in the new world was a 
step toward independence, and every necessity for co-opera- 
tion and mutual effort was an advance toward democracy and 
union. 

(7) 



8 TJic Rcvolutio7iary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

> In America the backbone of the theory on which resist- 
ance was justified was abstract right. American statesmen 
considered the colonies as communities poHtically distinct 
from Great Britain, and although their inhabitants were 
Englishmen, although they were closely united to England 
by relationship and by commercial ties, yet they were not 
a part of England and the House of Commons was in no 
sense their representative body. The Crown, in union with 
the colonial Assemblies, was the only recognized ruler in 
American affairs. The founders of the American States 
had possessed all the rights of Englishmen and they brought 
those rights to the new world. The fact that the people re- 
maining behind had not insisted upon their privileges until after 
the American migration was unimportant because they had 
existed before. The very reason why the Puritans came to 
New England or the Quakers and Presbyterians to Pennsyl- 
vania was that their interpretation of the Constitution was not 
recognized in Great Britain nor their religious organization 
sanctioned. In America they at once gave formal expres- 
sion to their religious and political creed. Contract and God- 
given rights were the foundation upon which their whole 
religious experience was built. Their only hope of God's 
favor was the acceptance of an eternal covenant with Him 
and their political ideas, drawn from writers like Buchanan and 
Lanquet, Sidney, Harrington and Milton, emphasized the 
same principles. When, therefore, Locke published his essays 
on the principles of government he was accorded a very differ- 
ent reception in P^ngland and in America. Englishmen saw in 
the work an excu.se for the revolution of 1688, and the 
Tories saw nothing more. The Whigs found there an asser- 
tion of principles which might in time be made realities 
and for whose advancement they should work. Thus far 
popular liberty had grown with the increase of popular power 
and the Whigs labored to complete that process. Their ideal 



TJic Foundation of the Revolution. 9 

was not, however, the breaking down of class Hnes but the 
recognition of more classes, an ideal widely different in theoiy, 
and productive of remarkable differences in practice from the 
one put forward by Harrington, Penn or Locke himself 

In America conditions were different. In many colonies 
the original emigrants were all of one class and succeeding 
additions had been by individual, rather than by anything ap- 
proaching tribal migration. In such cases the individual was 
absorbed into the body of the community and all stood on a 
plane of equality. In other States, like Pennsylvania and 
Maryland, where successive groups of people had been intro- 
duced, a liberal policy had admitted the new comers into the 
joint stock company already formed. Where political power 
was retained by the first settlers, it was by disproportionate 
representation and not by political disfranchisement. In no 
colony was an aristocracy of birth formally , recognized, a 
spiritual aristocracy selected by God dwarfing all other dis- 
tinctions. In America, therefore, the work of Locke was 
considered as no mere excuse for the revolution of 1688, no 
mere announcement of what should be sought in the future, 
but the statement of an historic fact. Following the lead of 
earlier writers, he had given an elaborate explanation of the 
original English Constitution for which they and their fathers 
had fought during years of persecution. This was the Con- 
stitution which they would not abandon, which could not be 
taken from them without their own consent, and which they 
had brought with them to the new world. 

To their minds the Tudor and Stuart absolutisms might have 
deprived their brethren who had remained in England of the 
benefits of this Constitution for a time, but the principles upon 
which the colonial governments were founded had been finally 
recognized in England. The English people had repented and 
had come back to the true view and by so doing had justified 
the colonial attitude. England and the American colonies, 



10 TJie Revolutionary Movcmc7ti in Pennsylvania. 

united by a king and council which each accepted for itself, 
could move along together. Each people by an original con- 
tract had formed a new society in a wilderness, the one in the 
fifth the others in the seventeenth century, " No circum- 
stance," said Jefferson, " has occurred to distinguish materi- 
ally the British from the Saxon emigration." ' Each colony 
had made a compact with a king or a proprietor who repre- 
sented him, in which were stated the conditions according to 
which society should be regulated. The English and Irish 
might not have those conditions stated in any one document, 
and the Americans might have charters, but that fact con- 
stituted no essential difference. Each nation was morally 
justified in maintaining its rights. 

In Pennsylvania these compacts were openly called agree- 
ments between proprietor and people, and government in the 
form of a joint stock company was thus openly recognized. As 
,y Logan wrote as early as 1704: "This people think privileges 
their due and all that can be grasped, to be their native right "^ 
"Government in general," remarked Lord Sommers, "as 
ordained and instituted by God, is circumscribed and limited 
by him, to be exercised according to the laws of nature, 
in subserviency to his own glory and the benefit of man- 
kind. All rulers are confined by the almighty and supreme 
Sovereign, to exert their governing power for the promot- 
ing his service and honour, and to exercise their authority 
for the safety, welfare and prosperity of those over whom 
they are established. Though there were no previous com- 
pacts and agreements between Princes and people as to these, 
yet Princes would be obliged to observe them, for-as-much as 
they are settled and determined by the law and appointment of 
the divine legislator.". . ."God having in the institution of magis- 

' A Summary View of the Rights of British America. Philadelphia and 
Williamsburg, 1774. 

^ Perm Logan Corres. I, 299. 



The Foundatio7i of the Revolution. ii 

tracy confined such as shall be chosen rulers, within no other 
limits in reference to our civil concerns, save that they are to 
govern for the good of those over whom they come to be estab- 
lished; it remains free and entire for the people at their first 
erection of, and submission to government, to prescribe and 
define what shall be the measures and boundaries of the public 
good, and unto what rules and standard the magistrate shall be 
restrained." . . . What power " he cannot derive from 
some concession of the society must be acknowledged to remain 
vested in the people." ..." No civil government is law- 
ful, but what is founded upon compact and agreement between 
those chosen to govern and those who condescend to be 
governed." " Force or conquest give no just nor legal 
title over a people . . . until they, by some consent, either 
tacit or explicit, declare their acquiescence " (p. 36). " In 
all disputes between power and liberty, power must always be 
proved, but liberty proves itself; the one being formed on 
positive law, the other upon the law of nature." The author 
then quotes Bracton (p. 57): "The king doth no wrong 
inasmuch as he doth nothing but by law." ..." He 
hath originally subjected himself to law by his coronation 
oath " (p. 63). " Magna Charta being only an abridgment 
of our ancient laws and customs, the King that swears to it, 
swears to them all, and is not admitted to be the inteipreter 
of it." The people have authority to set aside their governors, 
" for, as the whole body natural may cure its head when out 
of order, so may the body politic cure or purge their heads, 
when they are pernicious or destructive to the body politic." 
And as " the body natural, if it had ability to cut off 
its aching or sickly head, and take another, I doubt not but 
what it would do it ; and all men would confess it had authority 
sufficient, ... so may the body politic choose another 
head and govern in the room of its destructive one " (p. 98). 
" The doctrine of absolute passive obedience is a treasonable, 



12 The Revolutionary Movemenl in Pemtsylvania. 

slavish and pernicious doctrine, by disarming the people of all 
their civil rights and taking away self-defence, which is the 
law of God and nature," ^ 

This feeling of independence was particularly strong in 
Pennsylvania. Constantly in the discussions between the 
Whigs and the Loyalists it was asserted that the founders of 
the colony had created a new society in America as Montes- 
quieu considered the Saxons to have founded the English state, 
and that all rights possessed by any man at any time, remained 
to him unless they had been expressly surrendered. This 
feeling was strengthened by the early history of the colony. 
Either by seizure or by purchase the colonial immigrants had 
acquired the rights to the soil formerly possessed by the 
Indians and were therefore independent. It was idle to speak 
of Pennsylvania as an extension of English soil when neither 
the English religion nor the English government was extended 
to the colony or considered as essential to its well-being. In 
the preface to the charter of 1682 Penn had distinctly declared 
that he had no intention of establishing any particular form of 
government in the province except such as the well-being of 
its inhabitants demanded. His sentiments were strikingly 
like those of Burke nearly a century later, and as the Irish- 
man was defending the resistance of the American colonies, 
so the Quaker was laying the foundation on which that 
resistance was based. 

Penn favored no one form of government. " I do not find 
a model in the world that time, place and some singular 
emergencies have not necessarily altered ; nor is it easy to 
frame a civil government that shall serve all places alike. I 
know what is said by the several admirers of monarchy, 
aristocracy and democracy, which are the rule of one, a few 
and of many, and are the three common ideas of government, 

' The Judgment of Whole Kingdoms and Nations. By John Sommers. Phil- 
adelphia, 1773. Several other editions were printed in America. 



The Foundation of the Revolution. 13 

when men discourse on the subject. But I choose to solve 
the controversy with this small distinction, and it belongs to / 
all three : Any governnmit is free to the people under it {zvhai- 
ever be the frame) ivhere the laws nUe and the people are a 
party to those lazus, and more than this is tyranny, oligarchy and 
confusion. ... I know some say, let us have good laws and 
no matter for the men who execute them : but let them con- 
sider that though good laws do well, good men do better." 

In questions of religion the departure from English prece- 
dent was no less marked. The religious toleration of Penn- 
sylvania led inevitably toward a respect for the opinions of 
others, and democracy has no firmer foundation than this. 
Every argument advanced against the established church of 
England and its policy was an aid to the democratic movement 
within the colony, and at no time were those arguments more 
numerous than during the decade immediately preceding the 
revolution. 

Racial differences also, favored the growth of a democratic 
theory of government. If the support of all creeds was 
necessary to prevent Episcopal domination, so the support of 
all races was needed to successfully oppose English political 
control, and in no colony were so many nationalities repre- 
sented as in Pennsylvania. In 1755 Provost Smith of the 
University declared in a letter to Rev. Thomas Barton : " We 
are a people thrown together from various quarters of the 
world, differing in all things — Language, Manners and Senti- 
ments." There were in the colony immigrants from the whole 
northern coast of Europe as well as representatives from the 
British Islands and southern Germany. The English were 
the original holders of power, but only during a few years 
did they form a majority of the people. By ingenious political 
management the English counties retained control of the 
Assembly until the revolution, but it was only because of gross 
inequality of representation. With the intense preaching of 



14 TIic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

majority rule and the emphasis placed upon the individual at 
that time, this inequality was realized throughout the whole 
province. At once the arguments which had been used 
against English misrule were turned against minority control 
and misgovernment within the province, and a colonial revolu- 
tion accompanied and supported the international movement. 
It was this uprising of the discontented elements in Penn- 
sylvania which threw the colonial aristocracy into alliance 
with England and, in conjunction with his religious faith, 
changed the Quaker from a patriot to a loyalist. Not until 
the eastern leaders realized that American independence meant 
the recognition of new forces within the colony, did the 
counties of Philadelphia, Chester and Bucks refuse to support 
the revolutionary movement. Until 1775 all races in Penn- 
sylvania had cultivated that spirit of self-reliance which is the 
foundation of our national life, and none more diligently than 
the Society of P'riends. Even when national independence 
meant Quaker subordination, there were many among that 
denomination who sunk their individual interest in the general 
good. This is not the view usually accepted. It is generally 
assumed that the part played by the Friends was wholly in 
favor of maintaining the old order. The reluctance of that 
sect to enter an armed conflict with Great Britain is well 
known and it seems a direct contradiction to assert that the 
movement for independence in the colony was largely due to 
Quaker influence. Yet if the reasons which have been 
assigned for the development of a spirit of self-reliance in 
America are the true ones, we should expect the founders of 
Pennsylvania to have been urgent advocates of separation 
from England. Such, indeed, was the case and it is only by 
confusing American independence with the Revolutionary War 
that the part taken by the Friends is misjudged. No people 
were more heartily opposed to outside control of any kind 
than were the rulers of Pennsylvania. No denomination 



The Foundation of the Revolution. 1 5 

furnished abler arguments to maintain the truth of the 
American contention than those which Dickinson advanced in 
behalf of his colony. If, as was contended, the formal 
declaration of 1776 was the announcement of a fact and not 
the assertion of an intention, it will be difficult to find a colony 
which had more stoutly maintained that fact than had the 
Quaker State of Pennsylvania. 

In no less degree than the Puritans, the Friends came to 
America to found a permanent settlement, governed according 
to their own ideals, and in which neither proprietary nor par- 
liamentary interference was to be tolerated. It was to retain 
colonial independence that the Quaker influence fought the 
Penn government so bitterly during the long period preceding 
the Stamp Act, and in the same spirit English interference was 
resented. Love of power led the original settlers to be jealous 
of the newcomers, who were gradually obta'ining control 
throughout the western counties of the State, and the same 
motive explains in part the Quaker attitude during the 
revolution, but the political experience furnished by the 
uninterrupted proprietary struggles of seventy years, and 
the theory of political independence upon which the Friends 
had insisted, were no small factors in equipping the whole 
colony for the dispute with England. The claims urged 
against the governor varied but slightly from those advanced 
against England or from the grievances which the revolution- 
ists within the State declared that they had suffered from their 
eastern rulers. We cannot, therefore, understand the conflict 
between democracy and aristocracy in 1776 if we fail to 
consider the conflict between Quaker and proprietor during 
the preceding years. 

The Penn family was interested in the colony of Pennsyl- 
vania in two ways. First of all there was the desire of the 
elder Penn to found a State which should have justice as its 
governing motive, and improvement in the religious and eco- 



1 6 The Revolutionary Movemeyit in Pennsylvania. 

nomic welfare of its inhabitants as its result. Second in 
importance to this in the mind of the founder, but of primary- 
interest to his successors, was the acquirement of the greatest 
possible revenue from the proprietary lands. The people of 
the province, as eager as Penn for their own prosperity, were 
thoroughly hostile to the desire for revenue shown by the later 
proprietors. They considered it essential that the policy of 
the colony should be directed by men conversant with colonial 
needs, and willing to attend to them. From the beginning the 
original settlers wished the colony controlled for themselves, 
and at once made a determined effort to have power secured 
them by the Constitution. In this they were largely successful, 
and a frame of government was obtained which practically left 
it to themselves to determine whether or not control of the 
legislature should ever pass, by legal means, to the later 
comers. 

The next step was to attain master}^ over the proprietor 
and the governor who represented him. The chief matters in 
dispute between the opposing interests centred around the 
questions of paper money and the taxation of proprietary 
lands. Each dispute involved the whole question of sove- 
reignty, for if there was property in the State which the 
Assembly could not tax, or if that body could not determine 
the financial policy of the government, its authority was clearly 
inferior to that of the governor. Yet further, if the executive 
was subject to instructions from England, and was therefore 
compelled to act in the interests of absentee landlords rather 
than for the welfare of the colony, local self-government was 
impossible. On these questions the first struggle for inde- 
pendence was to be fought. An abandonment of the right to 
govern themselves was not only contrary to the legal and 
religious conceptions of the Friends, both of which laid great 
emphasis on individual initiative and communal independence, 
but it was also a departure from the teachings which Penn 



TJic Foundation of the Revolution. 17 

had given the colonists for their guidance. In the preface to 
the charter of 1682, he had urged the importance of the indi- 
vidual in determining the success of a State, and in 1687 he 
had published for circulation in Philadelphia a book containing 
" Magna Carta," the " Confirmation of the Charters " of 1297 
and the " De Tallagio non Concedendo," which more narrowly- 
limited the king than did the others. These laws were given 
them, he said, that " every man that is a subject to the crown 
of England may understand what is his right and how to 
preserve it from unjust and unreasonable men. ... I have 
ventured to make it public hoping it may be of use and 
service to many freemen, planters and inhabitants of this 
country, to whom it is sent and recommended, wishing it may 
raise up noble resolutions in all the freeholders in these new 
colonies not to give away anything of Liberty and Property 
that at present they (or of right as loyal suljjects ought to) 
enjoy, but take up the good example of our Ancestors, and 
understand that it is easy to part with or give away gr^at 
privileges but hard to gain them if once lost." 

From the outset the Assembly, acting in the name of the 
whole people, followed Penn's advice and, supported by the 
self-reliant spirit of its constituency, obtained under Lloyd 
practically all the rights and privileges of an independent 
government. At least as early as 1701, when conditions in 
England were very unstable, the question arose as to the 
source of authority in the colony. In " An Essay upon the 
Government of the English Plantations" [London, 1701], 
" An American " stated that " no one can tell what is law and 
what is not in the plantations. Some hold that the law of 
England is chiefly to be respected, and, where that is deficient, 
the laws of the several colonies are to take place ; others are 
of opinion that the laws of the colonies are to take the first 
place and that the law of England is of force only where they 
are silent ; others there are who contend for the laws of the 



1 8 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

colonies, in conjunction with those that were in force in 
England at the first settlement of the colony, and lay down 
that as the measure of our obedience, alleging that we are not 
bound to observe any late acts of parliament in England 
except such only where the reason of the law is the same 
here that it is in England." Taking advantage of this uncer- 
tainty, the Assembly increased its opposition to proprietary 
influence and Penn, who did not know whether or not the 
reigning house in England was soon to be displaced, felt him- 
self obliged to remain on good terms with the colonists and 
assented to most of their claims. 

By the middle of the eighteenth century the colonists, in 
referring to the disputes of 1701-12, urged that Penn had 
never intended to continue indefinitely his control of the 
province. In the charters and constitutions he had retained 
no great share in determining the colonial policy, and in 1712 
he had tried to relieve himself of all the trouble connected 
with its supervision. His object, so it w^as claimed, had been 
secured by that time. The colony had become self-sustaining 
and competent to control its own concerns so that, saving the 
rents from his own land, the great proprietor would have been 
willing to withdraw. (This was Franklin's argument in 1764.) 
All friends of the province had been of the same opinion and 
it was merely because the Crown would not adequately com- 
pensate him for his trouble and expense, or indeed because 
the Crown was not sufficiently vigorous to take any action, 
that Penn had not retired early in the century.^ 

Later proprietary policy had strengthened the impression that 
monetary return was the main wish of the Penn family. 
When the younger members of that family came into control 
they had shown themselves willing to sell their rights in the 
colony and it was only because the people were represented 

' The opinions of Penn at that time are in the second volume of the Penn- 
Logan Correspondence and in Pennsylvania Archives, 2d. Ser., Vol. 7. 



The Foundation of the Revolution. 19 

as opposed to Crown government that the negotiations had 
been abandoned. Whatever might have been the opinions of 
the proprietors, the dominant party in the Assembly had no 
intention of submitting to any outside authority. Lloyd's 
victory over Logan had but illustrated the fact that practical 
independence, under whatever name, was the Quaker ideal. 
The question of proprietor versus king was unimportant, the 
real question was colony versus either. 

As first comers and the framers of the original compact of 
government the Friends felt a sense of ownership in the 
colony, and had no disposition to admit others into that pos- 
session. Recognizing that the Constitution of 1701 had been 
practically forced upon Penn by themselves, the Quakers 
considered that they had the right not only to exclude the 
later immigrants from power, but also to decrease as much as 
possible the influence of the governor himself. In other 
colonies there were disputes between governor and Assembly, 
but the position of landlord held by the proprietor of Penn- 
sylvania made the disputes in that colony exceptionally bitter.^ 
If the Assembly could make the governor responsible to the 
legislature, the proprietors had no means of safeguarding 
their interests in the colony. On the other hand, if the pro- 
prietors in England, by giving instructions to the governor, 
could prevent the passage of all acts which subjected their 
lands to the common burden of taxation, then the province 
was not only paying the governor one salary, but it was pay- 
ing the proprietor another by freely protecting property whose 
revenue went abroad. The dissatisfaction over this seeming 
injustice was increased by the harshness with which the 
English owners demanded the payment of their rentals, often 
at a time when the cultivator was hard pressed to earn a live- 

^ On this subject Lewis Morris, president of the New Jersey council wrote : 
" The rendring governors and all other officers intirely dependent on the people 
is the general inclination and endeavor of all the plantations in America." 



20 The Rcvohitiojiary Movement in Pcnnsylvmiia. 

lihood for himself and family. Thus, in 1755 the proprietor 
wrote to his collector : " Braddock's defeat and the conse- 
quent uneasiness must not put a stop to your demanding our 
arrears in the town and by degrees in the countr}\ I desire 
you will say nothing about it in conversation, as it only raises 
discontents. We are only taking the same methods any com- 
mon landlord does, and shall continue to do it until ever)^ 
man pays regularly once a year"^ It was no doubt true 
that such were the methods of common landlords, but the 
proprietors of Pennsylvania were not common landlords. 
They were the heads of the provincial government, and their 
action as collectors of rentals reacted upon their popularity 
as governors. Their rule became hateful, and all proposals 
to limit their power were readily accepted by the people.^ 

After opposing claims to exemption from taxation, the 
Assembly soon advanced to the stage of refusing to the 
proprietor the right of instructing the governor on any point. 
Not only was the legislature to tax as it saw fit, but to pass 

' Penn Letter Book, Vol. 4, Thomas Penn to Hockley, September 29. 

2 This harsh policy was not pursued at all times [see Penn Letter Book, 
Vol. 6 ; Penn to Peters, August 10, 1759], but the effect of extreme measures re- 
mained. Many believed that the only interest of the proprietors in the province was 
to secure a large return from their investment. In 1764 the Assembly, in their 
address to the governor [Pa. Gaz., 1764, March 29] voted that it vras the pro- 
prietary which kept Pennsylvania out of favor with the king, that it was because 
the proprietors had taken the best land in the back counties and held it at exor- 
bitant prices that the population was no more numerous there, and that it kept 
immigrants out of the State, when they saw that the fine land of the proprietors 
paid no more tax than the poorest private land [see Dickinson : Works 1,252]. 
It is a good illustration of the length to which the Quaker leaders were willing to 
go in their contest with the Penn family that the lack of immigration to the Sus- 
quehanna Valley was considered as a grievance. The character of that immigra- 
tion was anything but favorable to conservative government, but in the purchase 
of these lands by Quaker companies and their subsequent sale to German and 
Irish newcomers at a profit, may perhaps be found one reason for the position of 
the Eastern merchants. If the proprietary influence could be removed, Whar- 
ton's Vandalia Company and other projects of the shrewd financiers of the East 
would have a much greater assurance of success. 



TJie Foundation of the Revolution. 21 

any law it chose, and by withholding supplies, the Assembly 
endeavored to force acquiescence on the part of the governor. 
One of the earliest examples of the use of this financial power 
was in 1709, when redress of grievances was declared by the 
Assembly a "condition precedent" to the support of the gov- 
ernment/ Under Keith and Thomas there were other in- 
stances^ but the most pronounced victory of the Assembly 
over the proprietors came in 1759 while the colony, under the 
pressure of the French war, was in urgent need of money. In 
1758 Lieutenant-Governor Denny had become involved in 
a serious dispute with the legislature over the taxation of 
proprietary lands and had recommended that a joint commit- 
tee, appointed half by himself and half by the Assembly, be 
entrusted with this power of taxation. In reply the Assem- 
bly asserted (April 8) that itself alone had the right to de- 
termine the course to be followed.^ " The made proposed by 
your honour of taxing the proprietary estate is without prece- 
dent in our mother country, anti-constitutional and inconsistent 
with the rights of the people ; and his majesty, and the peers of 
the realm of Great Britain do not insist upon a right of 
appointing commissioners with the other branch of the legis- 
lature for taxing their estates. . . . The right of granting 
supplies to the crown is in the representatives alone, the bill 
is not repugnant to the laws of our mother country but as 
nearly agreeable thereto as our different circumstances will 
admit," a phrase which was used to justify much desired legis- 
lation of the colonial period.^ The question remained nomi- 
nally undecided, but real victory was with the Assembly. In 
the following year the question of the issuance of paper money 
arose and the governor feared a renewal of the previous dispute,. 

1 See the account of the conflict in Proud, pp. 32-37. 

2 Col. Rec, 3, 174 and 4, 6SS. 

* Votes of Assembly, 4, 804-14; New American Magazine, May, 1758. 
^ Votes of Assembly, 4, S16. 



22 The Rcvohitionary Mm>emcnt in Painsylvania. 

In violation of his instructions from the proprietors, Denny 
signed the act providing for such issues and was rewarded by 
a prompt order on the treasurer of the colony for one thou- 
sand pounds. Improper motives were at once charged by the 
councilors, but this did not prevent Denny from assenting to 
the passage in 1760 of several other acts against which the 
proprietary had protested and for each of which it was stated 
that the governor received money rewards and a promise of 
more in case his assent should result in personal loss.^ 

These examples sufficiently indicate the determination of 
the Friends to secure the practical independence of their 
colony. East and West recognized that as their aim, and it was 
known beyond the borders of the province.^ It was because 
such independence as this meant a control of the western 
counties by the more conservative East, that the non-Quaker 
elements throughout the State supported the proprietary in 
its conflict with the Assembly. With the overthrow of the 
Penn government the more recent immigrants associated a 
condition of greater dependence upon the Eastern aristocracy, 
" that wealthy and powerful body of people who have ever 
since the war governed our elections and filled almost every 
seat in our Assembly."^ So soon as this objection to inde- 
pendence could be removed, the West would be heartily will- 
ing to enforce throughout the colony the Quaker theory of 
individual initiative and government by the people. 

' See Col. Rec. 8, 357-62 ; Chalmers, An Introduction to the Historj- of the 
Revolt of the American Colonies, 2, 344. 

^Maryland Archives, 9, 351- 

^Franklin, Plain Truth, 1747. 



CHAPTER II. 

The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration. 



Authorities. 

Beidleman: The Story of the Pennsylvania Germans. Easton, 1898. 

Dift'enderffer: The German Exodus to England in 1 709. Lancaster, 1897. 

Sachse: The Fatherland [Philadelphia, 1897]; The German Pietists of Provin- 
cial Pennnsylvania [Philadelphia, 1895]; The German Sectarians of Pennsylvania, 
1708-42 [Philadelphia, 1899]. 

Proceedings of the Pennsylvania German Society, 8 vols. Lancaster, 1891-97. 

The Pennsylvania Archives, three series. Philadelphia, 1852 to date. 

Some other useful secondary authorities are: 

Shepherd: History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania ; the histories 
of Gordon and Proud. Hodge: Constitutional History of the Presbyterian Church 
in America [Philadelphia, 1839-40]. Hazelius: History of the American Lutheran 
Church, 1685-1842 [Zanesville, 1846]. Craighead: Scotch and Irish Seeds in 
American Soil. Green: The Scotch-Irish in America [Worcester, 1895], and the 
Proceedings of the Scotch-Irish Congress, 1889 to date. Much material is avail- 
able also in the Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, especially 
Vols. IV and X. 

By 1760 the Assembly of Pennsylvania had become the 
supreme power in the colony. Successive victories over the 
proprietors and their gubernatorial representatives had not 
only weakened the hold of the Penn family upon the province, 
but had led the colonists to realize their power. In the 
Assembly the counties of Chester, Philadelphia and Bucks 
elected a large majority of the members and their continuance 
in control of the province seemed assured. Overconfidence 
in the security of their position led these conservative counties 
of the East to disregard the interests of the more radical West 
and this in turn fostered a spirit of enmity among the Irish 
and Germans and led to results of great importance to local 
and national history. 

A close examination of the legislation of the province can- 
not fail to show the injustice with which those alien races were 

(23) 



24 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

treated by the Friends and to explain their attitude in the 
years immediately preceding the revolution. Most numerous 
among the later immigrants to Pennsylvania were the Ger- 
mans. During the second quarter of the eighteenth century 
it had been feared that this race would try to establish a 
distinct State within the province, and from one point of view 
the fear was justifiable.^ During this period the Germans con- 
stituted between one-third and one-half of the colonial popu- 
lation. They had neither sympathy nor acquaintance with 
English social or political ideas, and experience had taught 
them to look with suspicion upon all governments. By " the 
government" they had been harshly treated at home; by 
"the government" they had been deceived while in England 
(1700-10), and they had found the colonial government of 
New York little if any better inclined toward them. They 
had, to be sure, internal jealousies of their own, but as they 
wandered across the line from New York into Pennsylvania, 
these jealousies had been subordinated to a general distrust of 
all outside control. Instead of attempting to allay this dis- 
trust the Quaker party determined to use the sentiment for 
its own advantage. Representing the proprietary as the real 
government of the province and themselves as an opposition 
intent on securing popular rights, the Friends laid the founda- 
tion of an alliance with the Germans, to which several of their 
religious ideas contributed and which lasted for many years. 
The Quaker principles of peace and of religious toleration 
attracted a large number of the German immigrants and a 
common opposition to the Penn family in their capacity of land- 
lords gave a further bond of sympathy between them. The 
real desire of the Germans, however, was to be let alone, and 
to secure this favor they were willing to acquiesce in the Quaker 
demand for unchallenged power, but they were never active 
allies. By their indifference to political power the newcomers 

1 Watson, Annals of Philadelphia, i, 472-4. 



The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration. 25 

gave a seeming assent to the old regime, but a permanent 
union of interests between the Germans and the Quaker party 
never existed.^ 

In the older counties of the East it was well enough to 
represent the proprietors as the grinding landlords and the 
Quaker as the protector of the popular interests. In the 
western portion of the province this representation failed. 
Here the danger to property and wealth came not from the 
proprietor whose demands could be evaded, but from the 
Indians and French, against whose attacks a military defence 
was needed. For this defence the Assembly would not 
adequately provide, although both governor and westerner 
repeatedly urged the duty upon the Quaker leaders. For 
this neglect the Germans had no difficulty in fixing responsi- 
bility, and if their own good sense had not told them, their 
Scotch-Irish neighbors would readily have supplied the desired 
information. Trade jealousies also sprang up between the 
Germans of Lancaster and the Quakers of Philadelphia in 
their efforts to obtain control of the traffic in furs which 
formed such a large part of colonial industiy. Lancaster, 
obtaining its supplies from Baltimore and the South, was a 
dangerous rival to the eastern city for many years, and this 
rivalry had an important influence on Pennsylvania politics. 
Of these jealousies between German and Quaker, the 

1 By the use of the term " Quaker party " the author would by no means assert 
the identity of the rehgious body with the conservative easterners who controlled 
the Assembly after 1756. The dominant faction was bound by no religious lines. 
It was drawn from Episcopalians and other sects as well as Friends— the term is 
used as a convenient designation for the group of politicians in Philadelphia, 
Chester and Bucks counties who formed, in modern language, a ring, and whose 
object was the control of the colony for their own ends. The influence of the 
Quakers, however, was more in harmony with this party than with the West. 
«' Down to the very dissolution of the Assembly in 1776," says President Sharp- 
less [The Quakers in the Revolution, p. 94], "their spirit was felt in its 
conservative course, nor do the Friends seem to have lost their political influence 
in the state." 



26 TJic Rcvohitio7iary Movemetit in Pcnftsylvania. 

Scotch-Irish were ready to make full use. This race not only 
furnished the major part of the opposition to Quaker domi- 
nance for years, but finally carried the State for American 
independence. 

At no time during the eighteenth centuiy was the Pennsyl- 
vania German able to conduct an independent political move- 
ment. There was a decided advance in his ability during that 
period, but the capacity for organization which his two rivals 
seemed to inherit was not his. Thus while the Quaker main- 
tained an able conflict against the Penn family or its guberna- 
torial representatives and in later }'ears almost defeated the 
Whig movement, while the Scotch-Irish showed their ability 
in 1775 and again in the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, the 
Germans could do little more than fight ably under the leaders 
of the other parties. By the outbreak of the revolution they 
had attained sufficient capacity to control the committees in 
some of the towns or counties, but even as late as 1799 when 
they tried an independent movement (Fries rebellion), they 
knew neither what they wished nor how best to use their 
power. In all the colonial conflicts, therefore, the Germans 
appear as the allies — often the invaluable allies — of other 
races. In the East they supported the Quakers, partly for the 
reasons given above and also because of a lack of sympathy 
with the opposing faction. During the early history of Penn- 
sylvania the party which had supported the proprietary against 
the Friends had been largely composed of Episcopalians, and 
in almost no particular were they in harmony with the German 
immigrants. The new opposition, however, was in the western 
counties, and here the Germans and Irish had common interests. 
Both desired protection against the Indians. Both realized that 
in questions of land-holding the proprietaiy drove no sharper 
bargains than the colonial land companies and that its demands 
could be more easily ev^aded. Both wished increased repre- 
sentation in the Colonial Assembly and were willing to join 



The Infljience of the Gerniav and Irish Immigration . 27 

forces to obtain it. Both were averse to governmental inter- 
ference, and when the revolution came both seized the oppor- 
tunity to throw off the control of the eastern oligarchy. The 
direction of the movement fell into the hands of the Irish, who 
were more capable leaders, but an examination of the records 
of Assembly and Convention shows that no people more 
eagerly insisted on equal political rights than the German 
Associators and that no members of the Convention had more 
radical ideas concerning constitutions than the delegates from 
some of the German districts. 

The Quaker-German alliance in the East was one of the 
strongest supports of the oligarchy, and at first the eastern 
Germans had considerable influence with their fellow-country- 
men on the frontiers. Not until new issues aroused racial and 
commercial antipathies was this alliance successfully attacked, 
and even then it was hardly overthrown. Amoijg the wealthier 
Germans there was a strong conservative party as late as 1775. 
In the vote taken by the Assembly in that year to decide 
whether the colony should subordinate its will to that of the 
general Congress or should send a special petition to the King, 
there were but three western votes in favor of the Quaker 
proposition for separate action, and those were from the 
German county of Lancaster. The current among the poorer 
members of the race had set the other way. In common 
with their Presbyterian neighbors the mass of the Germans 
had been alienated by the overbearing conduct of the eastern 
autocracy and were glad to see its influence weakened. As a 
race, the Germans had no ties of blood to bind them to the 
English connection, and when the leaders of the revolutionary 
movement offered them an equal voice with themselves in 
colonial legislation, equality with natives in the American 
army, and the same religious toleration previously enjoyed 
under Quaker supremacy, the influence of their wealthier 
associates weakened, and the race as a whole pronounced for 
independence of both King and Assembly. 



28 TJic Rcvolntionmy Move vie nt in Pennsylvania. 

It has been said that German poverty compelled a depend- 
ence upon Quaker bounty and thus formed the basis of the 
early coalition between the two races, but this seems a mis- 
take. Although many of the German immigrants were poor, 
this was not the case in the East where the alliance was 
strongest. Had the race possessed the capacity of organiza- 
tion, there were plenty of men of sufficient property to have 
made excellent leaders for a distinct party. Among those 
Germans who came to Pennsylvania for conscience' sake 
rather than because of poverty, were such sects as the 
Mennonites, the Dunkers, and many from the Lutheran and 
Reformed denominations. The Mennonites, w^ho settled 
largely in Germantown and in Lancaster county had the same 
scruples as the Friends against bearing arms and taking oaths, 
and although those scruples were not always observed by 
either party^ they furnished a general basis of sympathy 

1 Oath necessary to be taken by all civil officers in Pennsylvania by Act of 
Assembly of 1705. 

" I A. B. do sincerely promise and solemnly declare before God and the world 
that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Queen Anne. And I do 
solemnly profess and declare that I do from my heart abhor, detest and renounce 
as impious and heretical that damnable doctrine and position that princes, excom- 
municated or deprived by the Pope, or any authority of the See of Rome, may be 
deposed or murdered by their subjects or any person whatsoever. And I do 
declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate, hath or ought 
to have any power, jurisdiction, superiority, pre-eminence or authority ecclesias- 
tical or civil within the realm of England or within the dominions belonging 
thereto." 

" And I do solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God profess, 

testify and declare that I do believe that in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper 
there is not any transsubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the 
body and blood of Christ, at or after the consecration thereof by any person 
whatsoever ; and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary, or any 
other saint, and the sacrifice of Mass, as they are now used in the Church of 
Rome are superstitious and idolatrous." 

" And I do solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testify and declare that 
I do make this declaration, and every part thereof in the plain and ordinary sense 
of the words read unto me as they are commonly understood by English Protes- 
tants, without any evasion, equivocation or mental reservation whatsoever, and 
without any dispensation already granted me for this purpose by the Pope or any 



The Influence of the Gcinnan and Irish Immigration. 29 

between the two peoples. The wealthier and more capable 
portion of the race, however, settled near the Quaker centres of 
population and the Friends took care not to arouse racial antag- 
onisms. In 1775,^ the proprietors had warned their represent- 
atives not to excite the Germans against them in any way and 
the Quakers seem to have taken this hint to themselves. It was 
at this time, when the proprietary struggle was about to open in 
the colony, that the wealthier Germans were admitted into that 
social aristocracy which Madison later spoke of as controlling 
Pennsylvania politics. This judicious action on the part of 
the Quakers kept the leaders among the eastern Germans true 
to the earlier alliance by giving them further reason for desir- 
ing the ascendancy of the oligarchy. Having obtained these 
leaders, the Friends felt certain of the retention of power in 
the province. They considered that the western population 
was unable to organize an independent movement and in this 
they showed themselves good judges of German character. 
Lest there might be some danger which they had overlooked, 
an added precaution was taken by obtaining the support of 
the leading German newspaper of the colony — Sauer's " Der 
Pennsylvanische Deutsche Berichte."^ Thus having estab- 
lished their alliance upon religious, social and political founda- 
tions, the Conservative party felt reasonably certain of con- 
tinued control in the colony. 

other person or authority whatsoever, and without thinking I am or may be 
acquitted before God or man or absolved of this declaration or any part thereof, 
although the Pope or any other person or persons or power whatsoever should 
dispense with or annul the same or declare that it was null and void from the 
beginning." 

"And I profess faith in God the Father and in Jesus Christ His 

Eternal Son, the true God, and in the Holy Spirit one God blessed forevermore; 
and I do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be 
given by Divine Inspiration." 

^ February 21, Penn Letter Book, Volume IV. 

-Wharton's Manuscript of 1755. "The party on the side of the Friends 
derived much of their influence over the Gennans through the aid of Christopher 
Sauer." The manuscript is in the Philadelphia Library. 



30 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

^Shrewd as were the Assembly leaders in obtaining the sup- 
port of the wealthy Germans, and so cementing the alliance 
which similar principles and common opposition to proprie- 
tary control had formed, they omitted two factors from their 
calculations which have already been mentioned, and which 
were destined to overthrow their political structure. Their 
first mistake was in concluding that the wealthy and peace- 
lovmg Germans of the East were the only available leaders 
for their western brethren. The second was in underestimat- 
ing the capacity of the western Germans to fight when once 
they had secured adequate leadership. Originally less com- 
petent in political matters than were their countrymen around 
Philadelphia, the Germans of the interior were forced into a 
severer struggle for existence, and as a consequence developed 
an energetic disposition and a pronounced feeling of self-reh- 
ance and independence. Many of them, it is true, were re- 
demptioners, and others, failing to be naturalized or lacking 
the small property qualification necessary for voting, had little 
influence in politics, but the first condition,— at itT worst an 
improvement on their situation in Germany,— lasted but a few 
years, and the second in no wise impaired their usefulness 
when extra legal measures were being considered. It rather 
increased their dissatisfaction with the existing government. ' 
» There was also a period in the religious history of the Pennsylvania Germans 
during which there was a decided gain in their spirit of self-reliance. For some 
years after their coming to America the German churches received financial sup- 
port from Europe, but about 1730 this assistance was withdrawn, and the various 
congregations were forced to rely upon their own resources. For the next twenty 
years there was a severe struggle for very existence among the country churches 
In some of them the forms of religion almost ceased to be observed, and as 
Muhlenberg said, " God and his Word were openly blasphemed." In others 
laymen came forward and acted the part of preachers, pastors carried on service 
at several places, and the churches lived on, becoming stronger than ever at the 
end. (The work of John Bechtel is a good illustration of the heroism of some 
preachers. ) W hatever may have been the temporary result upon popular morals, 
this experience served to strengthen the self-confidence of the German communi- 
ties, giving them some of the experience which made the New England Congre- 
ationahsts " Independents," not only in religion, but also in politics 



TJic Inflnoice of the Gannan and Irish Inwiigratmi. 3 1 

To these influences the western Germans responded by re- 
jecting the leadership of the eastern portion of their race and 
casting their lot with the opposition. Toward Great Britain 
and the old colonial oligarchy they were equally hostile. ^ 
Even before the radical forces in Philadelphia had acted, the 
German county of Northampton held a meeting to provide for 
the common defence of the colonies (December 21, 1774), 
and of the twenty-four members of the county committee, 
more than half seem to have been of German descent. Two- 
thirds of the members of the Standing Committee which 
later controlled the county were Germans, and the great 
majority of the county's enrollment was of the same race.'^ 
The wealthy men of the East were not able to hold even the 
Germans of Philadelphia to the Quaker cause. Claims were 
made that the election of May, 1776, was carried by the 
Conservatives, through the suppression of the German vote,^ 
and a little later Marshall declared * that at leaSt one-fifth of 
the members attending the provincial conference from Philadel- 
phia were Germans, while many others were working hard 
getting the army into proper condition. Nor was this all. 
A careful study of the time will show that it was in no half- 
hearted manner that the Germans took up the cause of colonial 
and continental hberty. No stronger support was given to 
radical measures than that furnished by the Germans, and no 
members of the Convention were more bitterly opposed to 
halfway measures. It may be safely said that in neglecting 
to secure the support of this race the Conservatives made a 

' The policy of the English Crown in hindering the naturalization of Germans 
in America alienated many from British allegiance. See the letter of the Board 
of Trade to the King, May 12, 1774, in Force, Am. Archives, Series IV, Vol. 
I, p. 673. 

2 German Hist. Soc. Proceedings, III, 70. 

* Packet, May 20, Marshall's Diary, May 21. 

* Diary, June 14, July 6. 



32 TJic Revolutionary Movemc7it in Pentisylvatiia. 

mistake from their own viewpoint, but a mistake which was of 
great assistance in securing American independence. ' 

This mistake of the aristocracy gave the democratic party 
its opportunity. If a contentious history for two centuries 
had done nothing else for the Scotch-Irish it had given them 
a great interest in pohtics, confidence in the principles of 
democracy, and a fierce determination to maintain their rights. 
The religious and the political movements in Scotland had been 
inextricably confused and the same reasons which had caused 
the foundations of the Presbyterian church government to be 
laid on the equality of man had compelled the political 
theories of its organizers to rest on the same principles. It is 
a matter of little moment to determine whether these princi- 
ples found their earliest expression in the government of 
Church or of State, for in Scotland and Pennsylvania the same 
organization seems from the outset to have been used to pro- 
mote both political and religious ends. In 1628, when the 
Puritans came to Boston, they knew how to establish a firm 
and systematic government which neither foreign effort nor 
domestic revolt could overthrow. The experiences of the 
next century in no way decreased the political ability of their 
fellow Dissenters who remained in Britain. In Pennsylvania 
local politics became a contest between the Quaker wire- 
puller on the Delaware and the Presbyterian wire-puller on 
the Susquehanna, the bone of contention being the German 
vote. The westerner was aided by his coreligionist in the 

1 There are many testimonies to the part played by the Germans during the 
war. In March, 1774, Dickinson wrote to Lee [Force, Am. Arch. IV, I, 
726]: "The people in general throughout the country look forward to extremes 
with revolution. Of these the brave Germans, many of whom have seen service, 
are in every way respectable." In June, 1775, a letter from Philadelphia to 
London said : " It is amazing to see the spirit of the Germans among us. . . . 
They speak with infinite pleasure of sacrificing their lives and property for the 
preservation of liberty which they know full well how to value from its depriva- 
tion by despotic princes" [Force, IV, II, 1033]. Graydon's testimony in his 
Memoirs is to the same effect, and the press tells no different story. 



The Inpience of the Germaii and Irish Inmtigration. 33 

city of Philadelphia, and, after a close contest, obtained the 
victory. 

Into the early history of the Scotch-Irish it is unnecessary to 
go at length. The effect which their religious principles had 
upon their political ideas has already been mentioned. When 
they came to America in the early portion of the eighteenth 
century they brought with them a firm belief that there were 
certain rights to which all civilized races of mankind were 
entitled, but which they would probably be prevented from 
enjoying unless they were prepared to defend them. They 
brought also a general distrust of the English government, 
upon whose promises they had learned to place no reliance, 
together with the feeling that they were destined for a great 
work in America. For the natives of Ireland at the time of 
their settlement in Ulster they had little regard, and the 
methods by which land had been confiscated fof their use in 
that province did not disturb their equanimity in the least. So 
in Pennsylvania they had none of the feeling prevalent among 
the Friends that the Indians possessed a title to the soil which 
could be extinguished only by purchase. On the contrary 
they felt themselves justified in appropriating whatever lands 
they wished, asserting that " it was against the laws of God 
and of nature that so much land should remain idle while so 
many Christians wanted it to labor on." ^ 

The original proprietor, true to his belief that under any 
government men were more important than laws, realized 
that the Presbyterian and Quaker peoples would not live in 
harmony, and warned the colony against this class of immi- 
grants, but his successors made such warnings nugatory. The 
later proprietors showed little reluctance in allowing men of 
any race and creed to settle in the colony if they paid for the 
land which they occupied. The Penns not only liked the 

1 This was in 1730 when they seized i5,ocx) acres in the Conestogoe manor. 
Watson's Annals, I, 452, 478. 

3 



34 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

money return thus obtained, but favored the establishment 
within the province of an opposition to the Quaker ring which, 
under Lloyd and his successors, had proved itself too sharp 
for their own representatives. Certainly the newcomers were 
feared by the Quakers. As a rule they were urged to take 
lands on the western boundaries of the province, where they 
would be as far as possible from the earlier settlements 
and where their energies would be employed in protecting 
themselves against the Indians.^ The original settlers also 
endeavored to protect themselves further by a technical con- 
struction of the colonial charter which gave them a double 
representation in the Assembly and effectually prevented the 
legal overthrow of their supremacy. 

The new immigrants, from the moment of their coming, 
showed little inclination to submit to Quaker control or indeed 
to the control of anyone. They came with the determination 
to establish a settlement of their own and soon made it evident 
that questions of right or of legal title would not be allowed 
to hinder them. Taking advantage of the difficulties in the 
conduct of the colonial land office, the newcomers took land 
where it was most easily obtained, and it has been estimated 
that as early as 1726 one hundred thousand persons were 
settled upon colonial lands to which tliey had no just title^ 
Although there is no means of knowing how large a portion 
of these landholders were Irish, it would be a conservative 
estimate to place the number at one-half, a proportion which 
was soon to be rapidly increased by the Irish exodus to 
America. It is difficult to determine the size of this race 
movement during the early years of the century, and doubly 
so to ascertain how large a part of the newcomers settled per- 
manently in Pennsylvania. Some located in New England 
and New York, others made only a temporary stop in the 

• Craighead : Scotch and Irish Seeds in American Soil, p. 276. 
^ Shepherd : Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania, p. 50. 



The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration. 3 5 

North, finally taking up lands in Maryland, Virginia and Caro- 
lina, and forming the basis of the later democracy in those 
districts. Immigration of this character seems to have been 
comparatively small before 171 8. In that year a noticeable 
increase began, and a decade later the movement was at 
flood tide. In 1727 six ships of Ulster immigrants were said 
to have made the port of Philadelphia in a single week. 
Complaints were heard that the merchants of that city who 
owned the ships sailing from the port would not accommo- 
date those desiring to come, and in consequence this class of 
business was going to New York. Other writers said that 
five thousand such immigrants landed in Pennsylvania during 
1729, and from that time to the middle of the century it is 
estimated that the average was not far from twelve thousand a 
year.^ The estimation in which the newcomers were held by 
the Quakers is shown by a letter of Logan's written in 1729 : 
" It looks as if Ireland is to send all its inhabitants hither, for 
last week not less than six ships arrived, and every day, two 
or three arrive also. The common fear is, that if they thus 
continue to come they will make themselves proprietors of 
the province. It is strange that they thus crowd in where 
they are not wanted . . . the Indians themselves are 
alarmed at the swarms of strangers and we are afraid of a 
breach between them, for the Irish are very rough to them."- 
In 1749 it was estimated that the Scotch-Irish population 
of the colony equaled the Quaker contingent, each form- 
ing about one-fourth of the whole, and in 1774 Franklin 
considered that the proportion had increased to one-third 
in a total of three hundred and fifty thousand. Accord- 
ing to Bancroft^ this element was the spirit of colonial 

1 Froude : The English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, I, 390 ; Baird : 
Religion in the United States of America, p. 154 ; see also the Proceedings of 
the Scotch-Irish Society of America for 1889. 

2 Watson's Annals, II, 260. 
> Bancroft : V, 77. 



36 The Revolutionary Movemetit m Pennsylvania. 

resistance to England, and Hughes, the government agent in 
Philadelphia during the period of the Stamp Act excitement, 
declared that the trouble was caused mainly by the Presby- 
terians.^ 

It was one thing, however, for the Presbyterians to express 
a dislike for England and a distrust in British promises, and 
it was quite a different thing to carry the colony with them in 
their contention. Whether they should succeed or fail in this 
effort was to be determined by their ability to obtain the 
support of the Germans and their cleverness in overcoming 
the conservatism of the East. Intrenched behind a secure 
majority in the Assembly, the eastern counties had seen their 
control of the province endangered but once, and that was 
during the progress of the Seven Years' War. Even then 
the loss of control was due as much to voluntary action on 
the part of the Quakers as to any compulsion from without 
their own ranks. During this period the Friends had been 
placed in a peculiar position. Their creed forbade fighting 
and encouraged tolerance even for Romanists, yet their leaders 
understood that should France be the victor in the contest 
with England, it would no longer be a question of tolerance 
for Catholics, but rather a question of their own position 
under Romanist control. Their sympathies therefore were 
not prevented by religious belief from being on the side of 
England, and we can say of them as of the other Protestant 
sects that they heartily supported the war. Yet even thus 
their creed prevented them from controlling the colonial 
movement. The early operations in western Pennsylvania 
were unsuccessful and the blame was thrown upon the Quaker 
Assembly. The leaders of the majority were accused of 
half-heartedness, and comparisons were drawn between them 
and the New England statesmen, who, it was claim.ed, were 

' See also Gordon, History of Pennsylvania, p. 571. 



The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration. 37 

acting very differently.^ The result was that control of the 
colonial resources came into the hands of the more radical war 
party, which was largely composed of the Presbyterians and 
the Episcopalians of the province, whose religion only in- 
creased their intense national feelings. 

With the defeat of France and the consequent removal of 
the danger of Romanist domination, the temporary harmony 
which had existed between all parties disappeared, and the 
Quakers again assumed control of the Assembly. From this 
time until the revolution there was continual conflict between 
the two political forces in the colony, headed respectively by 
the Quakers and the Irish, in which the questions of trade 
advantages, taxation, equitable representation and of proprie- 
tary control furnished the ostensible grounds of dispute. 
Meanwhile the two sections, estranged already by differences 
of race and religion, were becoming separated by diversity of 
economic interests. When a more important dispute than any 
thus far considered came forward for decision, the discontents 
of years culminated in open rebellion. On the question of 
the colonial attitude toward England the majority of the 
people found a plausible excuse for obtaining that control in 
the colony to which they considered themselves morally 
entitled, and an opportunity to win allies from other colonies 
in support of their action. Within the province the Germans 
held the balance of power. At the time of the Indian troubles 
the Quaker majority had assured the German voters that if 
the Assembly was sustained they would be compelled neither 
to fight or pay, while the opposition had offered the Indian 
lands as a reward for German support. During the proprie- 
tary-crown struggle of 1 764, yet more vigorous efforts were 
put foward. Seats in the Assembly were offered them by the 

I See, for example, the sermon of Rev. Thomas Barton urging Protestants to 
unite against the French, and more especially the preface to that sermon written 
by William Smith. Printed by several publishers, Philadelphia, 1755. 



38 T]ic Rcvolutmiary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

proprietary party, and Purviance explained that the design 
was " by putting in two Germans to draw such a party of 
them as will turn the scale in our favor." The spoils of office 
were also used. As Colonel Shippen wrote in 1764: "The 
Governor could not possibly think of appointing the Son of a 
Quaker to be Sheriff*, who had taken infinite pains in riding 
about the country to secure the interest of the Germans in 
favor of the violent measures of the late Assembly against his 
own family and government." ^ 

Although the Scotch-Irish were unsuccessful in their early 
efforts, events were destined to be more favorable to them 
during the years in which the attitude of the colony against Eng- 
land was being decided. As in 1755, so in 1775 the religion 
and training of the Quakers unfitted them for leadership in 
active measures. So long as skill in conducting the affairs of 
government or in leading a strictly constitutional resistance 
to authority was the virtue needed, no better leaders could be 
found. By his arguments Dickinson probably made as many 
resistant Whigs as did any other writer on the American side. 
In the cultivation of an American nationality distinct from 
that of England, no people did more than the Quakers. 
None sought independence more eagerly, but they would not 
fight to secure that aim. Having shown the nature of the 

^Samuel Purviance, Jr., to Colonel Burd at Lancaster, September lo, 1764; 
Colonel Shippen to Colonel Burd, October 6, 1764; Barclay's Pennsylvania 
Letters and Papers, pp. 204 and 207. Shippen Papers, September 18, 1765. 
Edward Burd to his father: " I heartily wish you may be successful in the ensuing 
election. I believe the Quakers will leave out Hughes and Galloway this time. 
. . . The Dutch express a great detestation to Hughes' party." 

In the same papers, Samuel Purviance, Jr., to Colonel Burd, speaks of the 
means necessary to unite the Germans, Baptists and Presbyterians against the 
Quakers. "Could that be done it would infallibly secure our friends a majority 
in the house." 

Israel Pemberton (October 25, 1765)10 his son Joseph: "The Chief Justice 
told me upwards of nine hundred were naturalized by ye Supreme Court yester- 
day, who are generally thought to be against ye members who voted against ye 
change of government." 



The Influence of the German and Irish Immigration. 39 

American position and set forth the true arguments on which 
that position was founded, the Quakers hesitated to follow 
where those arguments led. They thus allowed the Puritan 
influence which they dreaded to become the controlling force 
in their colony. The Episcopalian element could not con- 
sistently lead the movement for independence, nor would the 
Whigs have been willing to accept their leadership had it been 
offered. In the connection with England most churchmen saw 
the only hope of the establishment of their religion through- 
out the colonies, and any revolt involved the breaking of the 
tie binding them to the head of their church. It may have 
been that many among them had no desire, in their efforts 
after an American bishopric, to see their religion become the 
political force it was in Great Britain, and yet they were unable 
to guarantee that it should not. Against any such result the 
Dissenters of all denominations offered as absolute a resist- 
ance as had the Puritans under Cromwell. Had all the Penn- 
sylvania churchmen been as patriotic as were some of their 
number, it would have been vain for them in the face of their 
previous alliances with proprietor and Assembly to offer their 
leadership against the mother country. So far as religion led 
democracy at this time it was the religion of Puritan New 
England and the Presbyterian South. 

The coming of the Scotch-Irish to Pennsylvania overthrew 
the Quaker supremacy in that colony. Without mentioning 
their influence in Virginia or in other colonies, it is enough 
to see how the Presbyterians organized a revolution in Penn- 
sylvania against the oligarchy which had controlled the 
colony for a generation. In their efforts to secure victory 
within the province, the radicals created a machine which 
was used with great effect when the larger question of 
independence came forward for decision. 



CHAPTER III. 

The Pennsylvania Assembly Under the Colonial 
Government. 



Authorities. 

The material for this chapter has been obtained almost exclusively from the 
Votes of the Assembly, the Pennsylvania newspapers and the pamphlet literature 
of the period. Especially during the years 1764-65 and 1772-76 has the last 
source proved a rich one. Aside from such sources as these, there is no adequate 
treatment of the subject. The best presentation is in Sharpless : A Quaker 
Experiment in Government and The Quakers in the Revolution [Philadelphia, 
1897 and 1899]. 

In a consideration of the causes of the revolution in Penn- 
sylvania, one can but notice the close correspondence between 
the dissensions which were dividing America from Great 
Britain and those which were in like manner alienating certain 
parts of the colony from the original counties along the Dela- 
ware, Just as the differences in customs, in race, and in reli- 
gion made the American colonists distinct from the governing 
classes in England, even before their immigration to the New 
World, so the Germans and Irish of Western Pennsylvania 
were from the date of their settlement distinct from the Eng- 
lish Quakers of the East ; and as differences in economic inter- 
est served to widen the breach between America and England, 
so the hardships of frontier life and trade connections with 
Maryland intensified the original hostility between the Dela- 
ware and Susquehanna Valleys. In another way also the 
conditions were similar. As the governing classes in England 
were alienating the cities of London and Liverpool, and so 
raising up allies to the American cause, the social and com- 
mercial aristocracy of the eastern counties of Pennsylvania 

(40) 



The Assembly Under the Colonial Government. 41 

was arousing an enmity among the populace of Philadelphia 
which was to contribute largely to the movement against the 
oligarchical government of the Assembly. There can be no 
doubt that many of the reasons which induced America to 
throw off the British connection also induced the Susque- 
hanna Valley to throw off the control of the eastern 
Quakers, 

In one respect, however, the parallel between colony and 
empire fails. The dissatisfied portions of the province were 
represented in the Colonial Assembly, but America elected 
no members of the House of Commons ; and as certain writers 
have considered the lack of Parliamentary representation as the 
cause of the revolution against England, it may be worth 
while to examine with some care the connection between revo- 
lution and representation as it is illustrated in the internal 
history of Pennsylvania. Franklin, in his exarpination before 
the House of Commons, expressed doubt whether a few seats 
in Parliament would satisfy American aspirations, and a century 
later an English writer (Mr. Egerton, in his " British Colonial 
Policy,") has given the same opinion ; but while the latter 
finds the basis for his reasoning in the conditions existing 
within England herself, the former had no need to search 
elsewhere than in his own colony for excellent proof of his 
statement. 

The original charter of Pennsylvania had provided for the 
recognition of the people in two ways : first, by a General 
Assembly of all the freemen in the province, and, second, by 
the election of a representative body in whose choice the 
counties should act as units. By the frame of government of 
1682 the Council was to consist of seventy- two members 
elected by the people, and the Assembly was to be a gather- 
ing of all the freemen. It was, however, provided that for 
this General Assembly there might be substituted a smaller 
body of from two hundred to five hundred members, annually 



42 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

chosen by the freemen at the same time and place as the 
Council, and under such regulations as the law should deter- 
mine. Because of the loss of labor occasioned by the assem- 
blage of all the people, the alternative allowed by the frame 
of 1682 was adopted in the following year, and it was pro- 
vided that the Council should consist of three and the Assem- 
bly of six members elected by the freemen of the several 
counties. Thus, as a result of this transition, there was sub- 
stituted for the unlimited democracy of 1682 a representative 
government under which each of the six counties was 
given equal powers of election and rights of representa- 
tion. 

Although the number of members elected by the individual 
districts was changed during the period of crown government, 
the equality of counties was preserved in both Council and 
Assembly until, by the Constitution of i/or, the former 
ceased to be a representative body, and had no share in legis- 
lation other than that of advising the governor. No altera- 
tion in principle was made in 1701 by the new Constitution 
regarding the manner in which the Assembly should be 
chosen. It provided that the Assembly should " consist of 
four persons out of each county, of most note for virtue 
. yearly chosen by the freemen thereof;" and that 
these Assemblymen were intended to fairly represent the peo- 
ple seems to be presumable, for the "Stile of Laws " was to 
be "by the Governor with the assent and approbation of the 
Freemen in General Assembly met" [Constitution of 1701, 
sec. 2] . As yet there was no cause of jealousy between a 
majority and a minority of the counties, and therefore these 
divisions were treated as equal representative units. It was 
felt that the three lower counties on the Delaware might not 
act in harmony with the northern divisions, and in order that 
the local interests of each might be attended to without causing 
a dead-lock in the Assembly, it was provided by the Consti- 



The Assembly Under the Colonial Govermnejit. 43 

tution that " if the representatives of the Province and Terri- 
tories shall not hereafter agree to join together in Legislation, 
in such tase " the three lower counties on the 
Delaware may act in legislation for themselves, and " the in- 
habitants of each of the three [remaining] counties of this 
Province shall not have less than eight persons to represent 
them in Assembly . . . and the inhabitants of the Town 
of Philadelphia . . , two persons to represent them in 
Assembly" [Constitution of 1701, sec. 8]. As had been 
expected, there was an increasing lack of harmony between 
the North and South in the following years, so that in 1705 
the anticipated separation occurred, and the Assembly by law 
increased the representation of the northern counties as the 
Constitution had suggested.^ So long as there were but three 
counties in the province and the population of Philadelphia 
remained small, there was little, if any, injustice in this act, nor, 
until the interests of the city became distinct from those of 
the counties, would its provisions excite opposition. With the 
growth of the western settlements and the increase in popula- 
tion within the city, the inequalities of representation became 
noticeable, and accompanying the neglect of western interests 
by the Assembly and the aristocratic tendencies shown by the 
dominant faction throughout the eastern counties, these in- 
equalities aroused antagonisms which never quieted until they 
were removed. 

In much the same way as the county members in Parlia- 
ment combined with the members from London and Bristol, 
or even with the mobs of those cities against the oligarchical 
faction which controlled the Commons, so the members from 
the western counties of Pennsylvania united with the two 
Philadelphia representatives, and later with non-voting ele- 
ments throughout the east, against what was considered a 
partial and unequal system of government. In like manner 

•Statutes at Large, Vol. II, p. 212. 



44 I'^ic Rcvohitio7iary Movement in Pc7tnsylvania. 

we may imagine that any American members whom Parha- 
ment might have admitted into the Commons would have 
united with the county members against the government, and, 
if incapable of thus forming a majority party, would have 
retired in disgust to the colonies and there overthrown the 
British control as the ill-treated people of Pennsylvania over- 
threw the eastern oligarchy. For a clear understanding of 
the movement in Pennsylvania we must, first of all, disabuse 
ourselves of the notion that the government of the Assembly 
was a free government. The same words which Burke used in 
regard to Parliamentary control of the colonies were equally 
applicable here. Government by the three eastern counties 
might or might not have been the best government for the 
province. Of that any one, then or now, has the right to 
judge ; but, whether good or ill, it was not free government, 
for of that, as Burke said, the people themselves were the 
best and only judges. 

The ruling classes in the three old counties felt that they 
best knew what the interests of the colony demanded, and 
from the time when the Delaware opposition had been satisfied 
by a grant of leave to withdraw, they determined that no other 
faction in the province should endanger their own control. 
To secure this object it was necessary to prevent Philadelphia 
city, where many of the early immigrants settled, becoming 
a power in the colony, and the western counties, as they 
increased in number and population, from electing a majority 
of the Assembly. If possible, a coalition between the city 
and the west must also be prevented ; and although it may 
be doubted whether the later dangers of such a combination 
were ever fully present in their minds, the eastern Assembly- 
men surely took care to provide against such dangers as they 
arose. In the east the danger was from the number of people, 
in the west it was considered as due to the number of counties ; 
so that means were taken to keep the number of voters in the 



The Assembly Under the Colonial Government. 45 

city of Philadelphia at a low figure, and in the west to erect 
new counties slowly, if at all, and to restrict their representa- 
tion in the Assembly. Thus, in the city the suffrage qualifi- 
cation was the possession of fifty pounds in personal property 
or a free holding, neither of which was easy to secure, while 
in the counties there was substituted for the latter qualification 
the possession of fifty acres of real estate, only twelve of 
which need be improved. As this was not a difficult qualifi- 
cation,^ the voters of the counties increased more rapidly than 
did those of the city, and while the city members were often 
found in alliance with the western discontents, it was more apt 
to be the Philadelphia town meetings and the later Associations 
which really expressed the popular sentiment, for these were 
gatherings of all the people. 

Although the idea of property is occasionally mentioned 
during the early colonial history as a basis of suffrage which 
would prevent political power going westward, the system of 
few new counties and small allowances of members for each 
was the method adopted by the Assembly for the accomplish- 
ment of its purpose. Lancaster, the first new county to be 
admitted (1729), was allowed four votes only in the Assem- 
bly,^ and succeeding candidates for admission received even 

^ The meaning and value of the qualification for suffrage in the counties which 
was in force after 1718 can be seen from the recognition of land values given by 
the act of 1763 raising money for the Indian war. For the purposes of taxation 
cultivated lands were to be rated at three-fifths of their yearly rental value, and 
in accordance with this estimate improved marsh meadow land in Philadelphia 
County was to be held at from thirty to ninety pounds a hundred acres, and in 
Bucks and Chester Counties at from thirty to sixty pounds. Thus, even in the 
east, the twelve acres of improved land required for voting in the counties might 
have a rental value of but three pounds twelve shillings, and a real value of six 
pounds. To this there must be added the value of at least thirty-eight acres of 
unimproved land ; but it is doubtful if an inhabitant of the counties, especially 
in the west, where values were much lower than in the east, need be worth over 
six or seven pounds to be able to qualify as a voter. 

'Dallas : Laws of the Commonwealth, Vol. I, p. 242. 



4-6 TIic Revolutionary MovcDicnt in Pennsylvania. 

less consideration. For twenty years, indeed, no new county 
was erected, and when, in 1749 and 1750, York and Cumber- 
land were admitted, they were allowed but two members 
each.^ Even this number appeared too large in the eyes of 
the Assembly, and in 1752 Berks and Northampton were each 
given but a single Assemblyman upon their ei^ection.^ From this 
time until 1 77 1 no new counties were erected, although petitions 
complaining of the grievance caused by this policy were repeat- 
edly received.^ This grievance was twofold. Not only were 
the increasing populations of the western counties deprived of 
the representation to which they were, or thought they were, 
entitled, but the size of the counties made it a difficult matter 
for many residents to go to the county towns to transact cer- 
tain necessary business. To this difficulty the poor quality 
as well as the small number of the roads contributed. It 
was, however, only a secondary cause of the dissatisfaction ; 
for when, in 1770, the Assembly voted that if the people of 
Cumberland County wished to be separated into two districts 
for administrative purposes — no additional Assemblyman being 

'Dallas, Vol. I, pp. 324, 329. 

2 Dallas, Vol. I, pp. 347, 352. 

3 A few representative petitions are here given : 

March 29, 1763. Votes, V, 255- Berks County petitioned for an increase in 
representation " in accord with justice, the spirit of the charter, and the law that 
first erected that part of the province into a county." Reference is made, as in 
other petitions, to increase in population, trade, etc., since its erection. 

Febraary lo, 1764. Votes, V, 313. Petition of Lancaster, York, Cumber- 
land, Berks, and Northampton. 

" We apprehend that as freemen and English subjects, we have an indisputable 
Title to the Same Priveleges and Immunities with His Majesty's other subjects 
who reside in the Interior Counties of Philadelphia, Chester and Bucks, and 
therefore ought not to be excluded from an equal share with them in the very 
important Privelege of Legislation ; — nevertheless, contrary to the Proprietor's 
Charter and the acknowledged Principles of Justice and Ecjuity, our five Counties 
are restrained from electing more than ten Representatives," etc. 

March 23, 1764. Votes, V, 332. Petition from Cumberland for more votes or 
a division of the County. 



The Assembly Under the Colonial Government. 



47 



given — it would be done, the proposition was not enthusias- 
tically received/ The dissatisfaction was increased by the feel- 
ing that the founders of the colony had never intended such a 
system of inequality, and references to the original charter are 
numerous in the various petitions. The early constitutions 
created no such inequalities. Either population or counties 
constituted the only basis of representation there recognized, and 
there was no reason for thinking that any change had been 
intended. The Proprietors also had been and were in favor 
of more equitable action ^ and, above all, equity demanded 
an increase of western members, whether taxation or popu- 
lation was considered the true basis of representation. Thus, 
in i76o,^if Philadelphia County with her eight members was 
taken as the standard, the western counties, judged by the 
number of taxables throughout the State, had twelve and the 
city of Philadelphia two votes less than their true quota; 

"What lies at the Bottom of all their Grievances [:. e., the people of the 
West] and must be complained of as the Source of all their Sufferings is their 
not being fairly represented in the Assembly." 

May 1 6, 1764. Votes, V, 340. Berks County petitioned for more members 
"in accordance with the principles of justice." 

January 20, 1768. Votes, VI, 21. Berks and Northampton ask for two mem- 
bers each. Leave was given to introduce a bill to this effect, but on January 27, 
after debate, it was rejected. Votes, VI, 29. 

1 February 9, 1 770 ; Votes, VI, 220. 

2 See the letters to Morris and Peters in 1756-57 ; the letters to Chew, March 
22, 1756, December 12, 1757 ; and others later. 

3 Representation, 1760. (Votes, V, 120.) 



Counties. 


Taxables. 


Members by 
Taxables. 


Taxes. 


Members 
by Taxes. 


Actual 
Members. 


Philadelphia County . . 


5,678 


8 


;^6,540 


8 


8 


Philadelphia City . . . 


2,634 


4 


5,926 


1% 


2 


Chester 


4,761 


6>^ 


5,237 


6 


8 


Bucks 


3.148 


A% 


3,305 


4 


8 


Lancaster 


5,635 


8 


6,198 


1% 


4 


York 


3,302 


5 


2,641 


3 + 


2 


Berks 


3,016 


^y^ 


2,412 


3 


I 


Cumberland 


1,501 


2+ 


1,200 


iK 


2 


Northampton 


1,989 


3 


1,392 


^% 


I 



48 TJic RevolHtio7iary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

while, if taxes were the proper determinants, and Philadelphia 
County again assumed to be fairly represented, Bucks and 
Chester had six votes too many and the west, with the city of 
Philadelphia, twelve votes too few. In later years the taxes 
collected from Philadelphia City and County are often reck- 
oned together, so that no true estimate can be made ; yet in 
one such year — and it is not an uncommon showing — the 
county of Bucks is seen to have had twice the number of rep- 
resentatives to which her taxation entitled her, while every 
county throughout the west had less." 

^Representation, 1768-69. 



Counties. 



Philadelphia (City and County) 

Excise 

Bucks 

E.xcise 

Chester 

Excise 

Lancaster 

Excise 

York 

Excise 

Berks 

Excise 

Cumberland 

Excise 

Northampton 

Excise 



Taxes. 



Li 



1,468 
2,407 
2,530 

346 
4,316 

562 
3,679 

503 
1,349 

180 
1,250 

343 

i,«95 

23 

1,108 

200 



Actual 
Members. 


Members 
by Taxes. 


10 




20 


8 




4 


8 




8 


4 




7 


2 




2+ 


I 




2 


2 




3 + 


I 




2 



Members 
by Gross 
Taxation. 



23 

5 



Taking Chester as our unit, since Philadelphia County here includes the city, 
and omitting the excise tax, Bucks in the east receives double its true share, and 
Lancaster is again the greatest loser. The east, as a whole, cannot be fairly 
estimated in that the city and county of Philadelphia are classed together, but 
there seems no reason to doubt that if that tax could be divided fairly evenly, as 
in 1760, there would be no great difference between the two tables. Nor does 
the counting of the excise make any appreciable dii^'erence except in the case of 
Philadelphia, as is shown by the figures in the third column. As the consump- 
tion of liquor was probably heavier in the city than in the county this increase 
would be apt to favor the city yet more. 



TJic Assembly Under the Colonial Government. 49 

Although the grievance against which the newer counties 
protested was a marked one in 1760, it became worse each 
year, for those counties were increasing more rapidly in num- 
bers, in wealth, and in tax-paying ability than was the east. 
Indeed, when the question of representation did not furnish 
the issue around which the disputes were conducted, the 
members of Assembly and their eastern constituents had no 
hesitancy in calling that increase into prominence. 

Thus, in 1760 an assessment had been made to determine 
the relative amount of taxation due from the several counties 
of the province for the succeeding fifteen years. Throughout 
the east, and more particularly in Philadelphia County and 
City, the quotas had been faithfully assessed and paid ; but in 
the west, especially in the counties of Northampton, Berks, 
Lancaster, and York, the assessors had rated the lands and 
personal property of the inhabitants far too low. . On January 
25. '^yj'h^ these grievances were summed up in the "Remon- 
strance and Petition from the Commissioners, Assessors and 
Freemen of the City and County of Philadelphia,^ setting 
forth that for sinking certain sums of money granted during 
the late War to the King's use, a Tax has been laid on all 
estates, real and personal within the province ; and for the 
more equitable assessment of the same, an Essay was made 
Anno 1760, by Order of the Assembly, for ascertaining the 
Annual Quotas that might be raised by the City and each of 
the Counties agreeable to the Quantity of Land and Number 
of Taxables then returned in each of them respectively." 

"That the City and County of Philadelphia . . . have 
from Time to Time assessed and paid into the Public Treasury 
sums so consonant to Law and the Estimate at first made that 
their Quota will be nearly paid in the time originally proposed, 
viz., by the tax of the year 1772, notwithstanding that the 

1 Votes, VI, 431. 



50 The Revolutionary Movonent in Pennsylvania. 

said estimate was at first thought to bear too hardly on the 
City and County." 

"That although the other Counties generally be more or 
less deficient in their quotas, yet some of them have fallen so 
remarkably short . . . that at their present Rate of as- 
sessing themselves Berks and Lancaster would require at least 
eight years more to raise their full proportion and York fifteen 
years, notwithstanding these counties since the year 1 760, and 
York particularly, have increased greatly in their number of 
inhabitants, the Quantity of Cultivated land and their Ability 
to raise Taxes, while the state of the three interior counties 
[/.^., Philadelphia, Chesterand Bucks] remains nearly the same." 

Thus, when it came to a matter of taxation the east did not 
hesitate to admit that since 1760 the relative growth of both 
wealth and population had been very marked throughout the 
west, but the Assembly did not, therefore, consider that a 
more equitable system of representation should be established. 
An indication of the feeling between the two sections is found 
in the accusation made in connection with the above statement 
that " an unequal proportion of the Taxes appears to be 
charged in those Counties on all land belonging to residents 
in this City and County." 

Charges like these made by the eastern counties demanded 
and received attention at the hands of the Assembly. Com- 
mittees were appointed to look into the matter, and they found 
that the charges made had a foundation of fact, although they 
were somewhat exaggerated. By votes in which the lines 
were drawn on a sectional basis it was decided that no lands 
in the province should be rated at less than five pounds a 
hundred acres, and that all improved lands should be rated at 
three-fifths their annual value. The measure finally passed 
on January 4, 1774, by a vote of nineteen (easterners) against 
eight (of whom seven were from the west).^ 

iVotes, VI, 497. 



Tlie Assembly Under the Colonial Government. 5 1 

This action removed the last grievance which the Dela- 
ware counties had against the west and the only justification 
which there was for disproportionate representation, but there 
was no evidence that the Assembly proposed to increase the 
quota of the Susquehanna Valley until a fair apportionment 
was reached. Indeed, one step was taken towards rendering 
representation more difficult by the provision that hereafter 
(January 27, 1770) all representatives "shall be chosen from 
among the inhabitants of the City or County from which they 
are elected," thus preventing the western counties choosing a 
member from Philadelphia, who, with less inconvenience, could 
be present at all times in the Assembly. 

Meanwhile the dissatisfaction throughout the west was 
being reinforced by the merchants of the east because of their 
loss of trade, and the Assembly felt compelled to yield a little 
in the face of the numerous petitions which it was receiving. 
February i, 1770, Berks and Northampton were each allowed 
an additional member in the Legislature, and in each of the 
successive years — 1771, 1772, and 1773 — a new county was 
admitted ^ with a single vote.^ This was the last increase in 

1 Bedford, Dallas, Vol. I, p. 563 ; Northumberland, Vol. I, p. 607 ; West- 
moreland, Vol. I, p. 663. 

' Petitions. — Northampton for an additional member, January 7, 1772, defeated 
by " a great majority." (Votes, VI, 375. ) 

Philadelphia City for more representatives, " since she pays one-quarter of the 
taxes," February 26, 1772. 

Northampton for a new county, September 21, 1773. 

Lancaster and Berks for a new county, February 10, 1773. 

Lancaster and Berks for a new county, January li, 1774. 

The northwest portion of Bucks to be separated from the rest, September 
19, 1774. 

Northampton for an additional member, December 8, 1774. 

Lancaster and Berks for a new county, February 23, 1775. 

No attempt to give an exhaustive list has been attempted, but the intent is 
merely to show how the same petition would be presented year after year. 

In 1776 the petitions were too numerous to be separately recognized, and the 
records are in this fashion : 



52 The Revohitmiary Movcmcjit in Pennsylvania. 

membership which the Assembly granted until 1776. During 
the spring of that year the agitation increased very rapidly, 
and the House was willing to do anything to preserve its own 
existence and nominal authority. It therefore provided on 
March 15/ for the election of seventeen additional represen- 
tatives from Philadelphia City and the western counties. 

Had this concession, which in 1776 was so evidently ex- 
torted by fear, been granted willingly several years earlier, it 
is possible — one can almost say probable — that in Pennsyl- 
vania, as in Massachusetts, the revolution might have been 
accomplished without the necessity of changing in any essen- 
tial the established government of the colony. The city 
of Philadelphia however, yet felt unfairly treated because the 
former unequal suffrage requirements were still maintained. 
Even under the new apportionment the east had a majority of 
two, and with Lancaster and the city counted as neutral, each 
having six votes, the ratio would be unchanged. It had, 
however, become too late for the Assembly to regain the 
power which it had several times allowed to drop from its 
hands. Amidst a general feeling of distrust which it did 
little to dispel, the Legislature, in which for three-quarters of a 
century representation had been manipulated by the three east- 
em counties of the colony for their own benefit, was displaced 
by a new governing body in which the former minority ruled. 

February 28. " Petitions for additional members were presented from York, 
Berks, Bedford, Cumberland and Northumberland Counties." (Votes, VI, 676.) 

March 5. " A number of petitions from the Counties of York, Cumberland, 
Berks and Bedford for more members to represent the said counties respectively 
in Assembly was presented to the House and read." (Votes, VI, 684.) 

^ Votes, VI, 693. Before 1771 the votes of the respective sections had been 26 
to 10 in favor of the east, and in 1775 the total of the west had increased to 15. 
In this reckoning Philadelphia City is counted with the east and Lancaster with 
the west, although the votes show that on many of the sectional questions the 
members from these two districts were divided about evenly. On March 15, 
1776, the Assembly resolved, by a vote of 23 to 8, that Philadelphia City should 
have 4 additional representatives ; Lancaster, 2 ; York, 2 ; Cumberland, 2 ; Berks, 
2 ; Northampton, 2 ; Bedford, i ; Northumberland, I ; Westmoreland, I. 



CHAPTER IV. 

The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 



Authorities. 

Votes of the Assembly. 

The Minutes of the Common Council of the City of Philadelphia, 1704-76, 
Philadelphia, 1847. 

The Philadelphia Colonial Press. 

The John Davis Papers in the Library of Congress. 

The Ephraim Blaine Papers in the Library of Congress. 

The Maryland Gazette, 1745-76. 

The Maryland Journal, 1773-76. 

The Laws of Maryland, 1637-63. Annapolis, 1765; ibid., 1763-76. 
Annapolis, 1787. 

Votes and Proceeding of the Lower House of Assembly, 1753-59. Annapolis, 
1759- 

Maryland Archives. 16 vols. Baltimore, 1883-97. 

The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science. 
Baltimore, 1S83-99. 

Scharf, J. Thomas, Chronicles of Baltimore. Baltimore, 1874. History of 
Maryland. 3 vols. Baltimore, 1879. 

It has already been shown that the racial and religious 
differences which were the first cause of the division of the 
British Empire found their parallel within the colony of 
Pennsylvania. The conservative class controlling the English 
Parliament had its colonial duplicate in the dominant Quaker 
population of Philadelphia, Chester and Bucks Counties. The 
Germans and the Scotch-Irish in the colony corresponded to 
the Americans and their sympathizers within the British 
Empire. Thus the ground was ready for a colonial as well 
as a national revolution. 

Some writers have maintained that the American cause was 
weak in Pennsylvania because national independence meant 
the downfall of Quaker government. It would be nearer the 
truth to say that the feeling against the colonial government 
gave the international movement the greater part of its 

(53) 



54 TJie Revolutionary Moi.>cmcnt in Pennsylvania. 

strength. Too often the democrats of New England and 
Virginia are regarded as inspiring the revolution in Pennsyl- 
vania. The reverse is more nearly the fact. No people in all 
America were more democratic than the dissatisfied com- 
munities in the Quaker colony, and it was because the pro- 
vincial government would not grant them equal rights or 
equal opportunities that these dissatisfied people welcomed a 
national movement under cover of which they might revolu- 
tionize their own colonial conditions. 

Discontent with the provincial Assembly existed in Phila- 
delphia as well as in the western counties. In both, the 
antagonisms which race and religion had created were 
increased by legislative favoritism, and throughout the west 
economic interest was working in the same direction. Just as 
trade connections with Southern Europe and the West Indies 
helped to alienate America from Great Britain, so trade 
between the ports on Chesapeake Bay and western Pennsyl- 
vania helped to alienate the new counties within the state from 
the old. As the frontier continued to send taxes to Phila- 
delphia and received no adequate benefit in return, indifference 
toward the east changed to positive dislike just as British 
taxation with no corresponding benefit alienated America 
from the mother country. 

It has been usually assumed by historical writers in their 
estimation of the mutual influence exerted by Pennsylvania 
and her Southern neighbor that the predominant force was 
exercised by the Quaker community. So far as the early 
period of colonial administration is concerned, this view seems 
to be correct, and there are instances in which the policy of 
the Maryland Assembly, so far as it was amenable to any 
outside influence, was determined by Pennsylvania precedent. 
It was but natural that such should be the case. In each 
colony there was a proprietary government. In each an As- 
sembly founded on popular election endeavored to increase 



TJie Growth of the Revolution in the West. 5 5 

its power at the expense of the proprietor's representative. In 
each colony the question of the taxation of proprietary lands 
was a vital one and in each the Assembly used the threat of 
an appeal to the Crown as a lever by which its will could be 
made the law of the province. During the early period Penn- 
sylvania was much the larger colony. Many provincial 
quarrels had been settled there before they arose in Maryland, 
and the methods of the Philadelphia Assembly were always 
available as models in case of need at Annapolis. 

As early as 1704 there seem to have been trade connec- 
tions between the two colonies ; but before the export trade 
of Maryland became important that connection was frowned 
upon by the Southerners. In that year (October 3) the 
Maryland Assembly passed an act "prohibiting the importa- 
tion of bread, beer, flour, malt or other English or Indian 
grain or meal, horses, mares, colts or fillies, or tobacco from 
Pennsylvania and the territories there belonging," thus giv- 
ing an early proof of that fostering of home industry which 
was a prominent feature of Maryland's later legislation. But 
the ties which bound the people of the two provinces together 
were too strong to be broken by adverse laws. The popula- 
tion of western Pennsylvania and Maryland was of the same 
race and religion, and lived under similar conditions. Here 
was the foundation of a union, and with the coming forward 
of Baltimore as a centre of trade, and the pursuance of a more 
friendly policy by the Annapolis Assembly, the two colonies 
rapidly drew together. Although the colonial governments 
would not act together against either French or Indians, indi- 
vidual settlers did so, and frequently were found combining as 
well against the administrative agents sent by their respective 
governors to collect taxes or rents. Indeed, one of the rea- 
sons why the proprietors of the two provinces were so eager 
to settle the boundary dispute between their respective terri- 
tories was to decrease this unwelcome co-operative action. 



56 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylva?tia. 

Another indication of the close connection between the two 
colonies is found in the circulation of Pennsylvania bills of 
credit throughout Maryland. Loaned out by the Philadelphia 
government, so much currency went to the southern prov- 
ince that in 1 766, the Pennsylvania Assembly, in its petition 
to the English government, gave as one reason for not depriv- 
ing those issues of their legal tender quality, " that a great 
part of the Bills now current, are subserving the Purpose of 
Commerce in the Colonies of New Jersey and Maryland, 
that the commercial Interest of the last mentioned 
Colony must have been greatly distressed without them, hav- 
ing had, for some years past no sufficient Medium of Trade 
of her own,"^ 

The Assembly of Maryland was more cosmopolitan and 
democratic in its composition than that of her Quaker neighbor, 
and the common attitude of resistance to proprietary influence 
taken by the two legislatures should not blind us to the fact that 
their individual composition was very different. The Philadel- 
phia body was controlled by the wealthier portion of the 
eastern counties and was in reality contending for an oligar- 
chical government, but the Maryland legislature was a 
democratic body, seeking to establish the principles of popu- 
lar sovereignty. This explains the different attitude taken by 
the Presbyterians and other dissenters of the two colonies 
regarding proprietary government. Until the Assembly had 
been made a representative body, the Pennsylvania democrats 
hesitated to increase its powers, lest they should lose all 
influence in the government. Their Maryland brethren could 
act unreservedly against the Baltimore family, for the decrease 
of proprietary influence meant the growth of their own 
importance. 

Economically western Pennsylvania was much more closely 
in touch with Maryland than with the Delaware Valley. 

•January 14. Votes, V, 449. 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West, 57 

Philadelphia, to be sure, was the largest city in America and 
the financial centre of the colonies. Her commerce was 
practically a monopoly. Her merchant aristocracy owned 
the ships in which their trade was carried on, and their profits 
enabled them to live in a style that excited the envy of their 
less favored neighbors. Owing to this commercial prosperity 
many luxuries found their way into Philadelphia, while the 
restraints put upon American manufactures by England made 
London and Bristol the warehouses from which she was sup- 
plied with everything except food. The rich lands along the 
Delaware and the Schuylkill furnished the grain which was 
exported in payment for the products of Europe or the West 
Indies, until a condition of comfort developed in the homes of 
the Philadelphia merchants which greatly exceeded anything 
found elsewhere on the continent and was luxury when com- 
pared with conditions throughout the west. 

The interior of Pennsylvania and Maryland 'was mainly a 
farming district. The cultivation of tobacco, at first confined 
to the latter colony, gradually extended toward the north, 
while grain culture as gradually spread southward. Prac- 
tically every farmhouse was a small manufactory in which all 
articles of wearing apparel and most of the furniture and 
household utensils were made. With the exception of sugar, 
salt and certain iron and steel manufactures, the western com- 
munities were able to supply their every economic need. Of 
the luxuries which came into Philadelphia, the Susquehanna 
immigrants were able to purchase very few. They had little 
use for them upon their farms and no money to waste in their 
acquirement. So long as their flour and grain could be readily 
delivered at tidewater to some merchant, by him exported to 
the West Indies and sugar and molasses received in return, 
the west had no concern with fine clothes or elegant coaches. 
Indeed, the Presbyterians were incHned to regard such luxu- 



58 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

rics as devices of the devil and the city itself as a place of 
crucifying expenses/ 

The trade in slaves and indented servants carried on be- 
tween the two provinces also illustrates their close economic 
connection. In this trade the Quakers seem to have had little 
share and the action of the Assembly in 1769 providing for a 
more careful regulation and limitation of such intercourse as 
this, even if it were necessary to appoint more deputies to 
enforce the law, was taken as a grievance by the people 
engaged in the traffic.^ 

Turning more definitely to trade in the ordinary acceptation 
of the term, there was one disadvantage under which Phila- 
delphia labored in the matter of foreign commerce which 
became more noticeable as shipping interests increased in 
rival cities further south. During a large part of the winter 
the Delaware River was either closed to traffic or was dan- 
gerous for the small ships in which commerce was at that 
time carried on.^ Although efforts were made to do away 
with this danger by building piers at the mouth of the river 
and bringing goods to the city on sledges, Baltimore con- 
tinued to have an advantage in this regard and as late as 1770 
it was urged that Maryland, Virginia and even New York in 
winter " secure a large part of our export and import trade." ^ 

' Certainly this was true a few years later. See the letter of James Lovel to 
Washington ; Sparks, Correspondence of the Revolution, I, 412. 

'Votes, VI, 141. 

'See the letter of Alexander J. Hill to Oliver Pollock at St. Eustatia : "You 
cannot expect any of our produce until the river is open again." December 21, 
1767. Manuscript in Library of Congress. 

* Votes, VI, 219. In 1761 the merchants petitioned the Assembly to make 
some provision for the erection of piers in the river that vessels might be more 
secure in winter and for a port near the mouth of the river where goods might 
be landed and thence by sledge or wagon brought to the city. 

In September, 1763, as a result of this agitation for the improvement of the 
water route, the Assembly provided (Carey & Bioren, I, 400) that money should 
be raised by a lottery for the erection of a lighthouse at Cape Henlopen. A year 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 59 

From this hindrance Maryland's trading port was free and her 
market was therefore more stable and reliable. 

Founded at the time of the great increase in Irish immigra- 
tion (1729), Baltimore by 1770 had become a city of nearly 
twenty thousand inhabitants and the economic centre of the 
Chesapeake region. Close rivalry with Philadelphia for the 
trade of Pennsylvania was not to be expected at first and the 
monopoly which the merchants of the northern city main- 
tained, led them to disregard the efforts of Baltimore and the 
Maryland Assembly to draw trade from the Delaware to the 
Chesapeake. This carelessness on the part of Philadelphia 
proved costly, for while the racial and religious antagonism 
between western and eastern Pennsylvania was gradually in- 
creasing, the southern trade movement was being strength- 
ened by the friendly attitude of Maryland. Even had the 
southern government shown no willingness to aid commerce 
by the maintenance of good roads, it was muth easier for the 
Pennsylvania farmer to float his produce down the Susque- 
hanna to Chesapeake Bay than to draw it overland to Phila- 
delphia, but by its aid in building roads north and east from 
Baltimore, and by maintaining an excellent highway from that 
city to Middletown on the river above the rapids, the Maryland 

later provision was made for further improvement (September 22, 1764, C. & B., I, 
407) and an additional lighthouse on the river was provided for in 1 77 1 (October 

19, C. &B., II, 37). 

There was also continual trouble with the pilots on the river, the fees exacted 
being excessive and the service poor. To break up the monopoly which the 
pilots had secured acts were passed in successive years (February 8, 1766 ; May 

20, 1767 ; May 27, 1769) in response to petitions and complaints, some of which 
came directly to the Assembly and more of which are found in the press. The 
grievance was not remedied, however, and to very recent years has remained an 
annoyance to Delaware shipping. (See also the Acts relating to the Wardens of 
the Port of Philadelphia, March 18 and June 29, I775-) O" the other hand, 
January 27, 1767, a petition from the Merchants of Philadelphia was presented 
to the Assembly in which it was urged that the regulations of the Assembly re- 
garding pilotage, etc., in the Delaware tended to " destroy or divert various 
valuable branches of Trade from this Province." Votes, V, 515. 



6o The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

Legislature greatly increased the advantage of the Baltimore 
merchant over his Philadelphia rival. ^ As regards such im- 
ports as salt and tea, the advantage was less marked because 
of their small bulk and because they had to be carried against 
the current of the river, but the manner of life of the west- 
erner made imports less important than exports ^ and his 
trade naturally went to the agent who had charge of his 
exports of grain. During the period when Baltimore was 
gaining her hold upon the trade of the interior the high prices 
demanded by the Philadelphia traders and the monopolistic 
spirit shown by the merchants of the east who thought they 
had the whole colonial trade securely in their hands, also 
increased the dissatisfaction of the west. From Baltimore and 
the south came the money which went as taxes to the east or 
to eastern traders for merchandise. This aroused the jealousies 
which naturally exist between debtor and creditor communities 
and they were increased, of course, by the failure of the east 
to help against the Indians or to assist in the establishment of 
roads although repeatedly petitioned. Even the traders of 
Philadelphia received scant attention from the Legislature, and 
the western producers from whom the earlier petitions came 
were practically disregarded.^ 

'See Gibson: History of York County, 321-330, and Acts of the Maryland 
Assembly, 1753, Chaps. 16 and 27; 1766, Chap. 24; 1774, Chap. 21. 

' Even in the minor articles, Philadelphia had not a clear field. Doddridge, 
who until 1773 lived in Bedford County, Pennsylvania, and afterwards in what is 
now Washington County, in the same State, and who is speaking of his own 
knowledge or from his father's experience, says in his Notes, Chap. XIII : " The 
barter for salt and iron was made first at Baltimore ; Frederic, Hagerstown, Old- 
town and Fort Cumberland in succession, became the place of exchange." In 
the same chapter he also speaks of cattle being driven from this region down to 
the Baltimore market. 

'The earlier petitions of the merchants seem to have related more to the 
Indian than to the colonial trade. On May 14, 1 762, a petition from the mer- 
chants of Philadelphia was presented to the house and read, in which it was 
said: "That the Remonstrants conceive the opening and forming convenient 
Passages for the Transportation of Merchandize to the Public Markets and navi- 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 6 1 

' Feeling secure in the possession of the interior trade, the 
Quaker Assembly made little if any effort to decrease the cost 
of transportation from the Susquehanna to Philadelphia until 
after the struggle of 1764. From then until 1773 attention 
was called to the fact that the western trade was being trans- 
ferred to Baltimore, and finally the Quaker merchants began 
to realize that the Irish and German farmers were not so much 
at their mercy as they had thought. Efforts were at once 
put forward to improve the roads and to establish a system of 
canals between the Susquehanna and Delaware River systems. 
The Revolutionary War interfered with many of these pro- 
jects, so that not until 1792 was anything done in a systematic 
manner toward the improving of the economic conditions. In 
that year the Philadelphia-Lancaster turnpike was under- 
taken and on its completion in 1794 became the first road 
suitable for heavy wagon traffic between the Delaware and 
western Pennsylvania. 

Baltimore and Maryland were more alive to the importance 

gable Parts of any Country, is of the utmost Importance to its Trade and Com- 
merce, and must greatly advance the general Good and public Welfare thereof. 
That sensible of this evident Truth, the neighboring Governments of New York 
and Maryland have opened a commodious Passage from the Indian Country for 
the Carriage of Indian commodities and Merchandize from thence to their respec- 
tive Markets and Navigable Parts, by which their Trade is daily increasing, to 
their very great advantage and emolument. 

"That for want of some such convenient way for the Transportation of their 
Goods and effects, to and from the Indian Country, situate to the Northward and 
Westward of this Province, the Merchants and Traders of this City have laboured 
under great difficulties and Hardships in transporting their Merchandize into the 
Indian Country and in bringing from thence their peltry to the City of Philadel- 
phia." They wish a water passage up the western branch of the Susquehanna 
that " goods may be transported to the European Markets sooner than from the 
neighbouring Governments. "-[Votes, V, 221]. The poor condition of the roads 
and the difficulties of transporting provisions as late as 1779-80 is readily seen by 
an examination of the letters which passed between the Continental authorities at 
Philadelphia and their agents at Carlisle and Lancaster.— [See the papers of 
John Davis and Ephraim Blaine in the Library of Congress. Davis was in 
charge at Carlisle and Blaine at Lancaster.] 



62 Tlic Revolutionary Movement hi Pennsylvania. 

of the situation. Legislation by the Maryland Assembly, 
united with town action, had improved the harbor of Balti- 
more and had built good roads from that city into the sur- 
rounding country before Philadelphia had realized the impor- 
tance of the movement. Especially had care been taken to 
improve the highway to Middletown on the Susquehanna, 
where the rapids of Concwago Creek made the river dangerous 
for the bateaux and keelboats on which the products of central 
Pennsylvania were floated down the current. As early as 
1739 trade routes began to be opened from Baltimore into the 
northern colony, thus increasing the commercial advantage 
which the water route gave, and in 1 749 a road was built from 
Fredericktown to the Pennsylvania line. In 1748 the Mary- 
land Legislature, in its efforts to stimulate the trade in grain 
and flour, offered grants of land to all those who would establish 
flour mills within her boundaries. As a result of these efforts 
it was estimated that by 1769 over 40,000 tons of flour were 
exported from the port of Baltimore alone.^ " From Harris- 
burg and Carlisle," saysScharf, quoting Doddridge and Kerche- 
val as authority, "to the upper part of the valley of Virginia, 
Baltimore was the only place the people traded with." Signifi- 
cant hints regarding this trade relationship between the two 
colonies are furnished by comparing the imports of Pennsyl- 
vania during the years 1768-69 with those of Maryland and 
Virginia.' 

In the financial year 1767-68 Pennsylvania imported from 
England goods to the value of ;^43 2,000, but in the next 
year, owing to the non-importation agreement, that total 
decreased to ;^ 199,000 (or by one estimate to £\ 19,000). In 
the same years Maryland and Virginia increased the value 

'Scharf: Chronicles of Baltimore, p. 125; History of Western Maryland, 
p. 436. 

2 I have not been able to obtain statistics for Maryland alone, but it is not prob- 
able that the union of the two colonies increases the strength of the argument. 



The Groivth of the Revolution in the West. 63 

of their imports from ;^475,ooo to ^^488, 000/ Too much 
weight should not be placed upon statistics, but these figures 
would seem to indicate either that a much greater amount of 
smuggling occurred in Pennsylvania than in the southern colo- 
nies or that trade was rapidly setting toward Baltimore. The 
second supposition is the more probable for it was precisely at 
this time that Philadelphia awoke to the fact that she no 
longer controlled the trade of the colony and, among others, 
"Elucidatus" asked in the Pennsylvania Gazette^ if naviga- 
tion and trade routes could not be opened throughout the 
western part of the colony. Moreover, it is probably true 
that the Quaker merchants of Philadelphia were fully as loyal 
to the trade agreements as were their fellow merchants in 
Maryland.^ During 1770, Philadelphia weakened in her sup- 
port of non-importation,* and finally, on September 20, it was 
determined " by a great majority in the affirmative " that the 
non-importation agreement as it then existed should be altered,^ 
although the country people, so far as heard from, continued 
in favor of non-intercourse.^ Is it not possible that the mer- 
chants of Philadelphia, in their anxiety to gain back the trade 
of the west, wished to free their commerce from restrictions, 
while the population of the interior, their necessities amply 
supplied from another source, preferred to have the fight main- 
tained ? Whatever may be the explanation offered for the 
difference of feeling between the two sections of the colony, 
the fact remains that the tide of commerce had definitely set 
toward the southern route, and that " many thousands of 
bushels of rye, oats, corn, wheat and potatoes" came down 

1 Franklin's Works, IV, 242, letter of W. S. Johnston; Penna. Gaz., May 24, 
1770. 

2 January 4, 1770. 

' See : Sharpless, The Quakers in the Revolution, p. 75. 
* Penna. Gaz., July 19, August 16, September 20. 
5 Gaz., September 27. 
6 Gaz., August 9. 



64 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the Susquehanna to Middletown and from thence by road 
to Baltimore/ 

At length Philadelphia became aroused. Speaking of the 
amount of western traffic which had left the eastern mer- 
chants and had gone to Baltimore, " A Friend to Trade " said, 
in "An Address to the Merchants and Inhabitants of Penn- 
sylvania" (1771): "By conversing with many experienced 
persons I find most of them are of the opinion that, pro- 
vided the ferries which lead over the Susquehanna to Carlisle 
and York were made free, and the road leading from Lancaster 
to this City, a turnpike or repaired by some other method 
that would keep it durably good, we should have a rational 
foundation to believe they would prove speedy and effectual 
remedies, for they might be made to operate immediately by 
reducing the expense of carriage from those parts, both by 
a saving of the ferriage and the advantage of carrying double 
the quantity in their wagons which they now do ; and if we 
should not be so happy as to succeed by this means to restore 
our western trade, yet the public will be compensated for the 
expense by the advantages which will accrue to the inhab- 
itants whose situation makes it necessary to use it." Of York, 
Bedford, Cumberland and Frederic Counties the same writer 
declared : " There are inducements for the Counties named 
to go to Baltimore rather than Philadelphia by its situation 
and communication by the Susquehanna rather than be at 
the expense of crossing that river, and afterward to drag their 
wagons along a road rendered almost impossible by the mul- 
titude of carriages that use it and tJic insufficiency of our road 
Acts to keep it in repair." ^ 

In May, 1771, Rhoads wrote to Franklin •? "The growing 
trade of Baltimore — drawn principally from our province west 

' Gibson, p. 330. 

^ Westcott, Chap. i66. Italics are the authors. 

'Franklin's Works, IV, 396. 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 65 

of the Susquehanna — alarms us," and in the Address to the 
Merchants and Inhabitants of Pennsylvania," already quoted, 
and published in December, 1 77 1 , it was urged that " Baltimore 
town in Maryland has within a few years past carried off 
from this city [Philadelphia] almost the whole trade of Fred- 
erick, York, Bedford and Cumberland Counties." It is added 
that unless some action is taken by which closer connections 
may be secured between the east and west the whole of the 
provincial trade will be lost. In 1772 another effect of the 
encouragement given by Maryland to colonial enterprise and 
more particularly to the grain trade with the Susquehanna 
district was seen. Not only had subsidies of land been 
granted to settlers from Pennsylvania and low prices offered 
them but more important privileges had been held out to 
manufacturers of flour, and at one time to manufacturers of 
iron goods. Availing themselves of this offer, in (772 Joseph, 
Andrew and John Ellicott came down from Bucks County 
and established the Ellicott Mills.^ 

Two methods of regaining the western trade were proposed 
at Philadelphia — canals and improved roads. So far as 
canals were concerned the recommendations of the commit- 
tees occasionally appointed by the Assembly, of the numerous 
writings in the press and pamphlet literature of the time, and 
of the petitions to governor and to Assembly appear to have 
had little effect.^ These efforts do, however, make very clear 

J See Tyson Settlement of Ellicott Mills, Md. Hist. Publications, Vol. 4. 

'See a pamphlet entitled Chesapeake (1768) in which a canal from the Dela- 
ware to the Chesapeake appears to have been first recommended. 

The petitions for canals seem to have had the effect of causing commissions to 
be appointed and resolutions passed, but nothing was actually accomplished 
toward the purpose in view. Thus on January 18, 1 770, [Votes, VI, 206], the 
Assembly in full committee resolved " that it be recommended to the House to 
consider the several petitions before them for opening and improving the naviga- 
tion of the rivers Susquehanna, Delaware, Schuylkill and other navigable waters 
within this Province," and it was recommended to the House to prepare and 
offer a bill for " improving and rendering more effectual to the trade of this Province 

5 



66 TJic Revohitiojiary Movcmmi in Pcmisylvajiia. 

the fact that the close connection between the west and south 
was acknowledged. This trade and the accompanying finan- 
cial relations could not have existed without tending to widen 
that breach between the Delaware and Susquehanna valleys 
which difTerences of race, religion and custom had already 
created. With each repulse in the Assembly, trust in the 
power of petition decreased and greater reliance was placed 
upon the efforts of the Baltimore merchants. The Philadelphia 
traders became all the more exasperated and sought other 
means of maintaining their own prosperity even at the risk of 
losing their popularity throughout the eastern counties. 

In their efforts to obtain improved roads the Philadelphia 
merchants had been seemingly more successful. On January 
1 6, 1770, a petition was drawn up and signed by some of the 
most influential men of the city, among whom were the Shippens, 
Biddle, Allen, Hughes and Smith, praying "for a road from 
Susquehanna to Schuylkill in Pennsylvania," ^ the object being 

the waters of Susquehanna with its branches, Delaware, Schuylkill, Juniata, the 
Lehigh and Neshominey by removing all Obstructions to the navigation of the 
said waters." As a result measures were passed to improve the river navigation, 
and a year later, on January 23, 177 1, "The House taking into consideration the 
great advantage that must accrue to the Trade of this Province, in case an inland 
Navigation can be eiTected between the branches of the rivers Susquehanna, 
Schuylkill and Lehigh," appointed a committee to examine and report on the 
expense necessary." — [Votes, VI, 275. ] 

September 24, this committee reported that a canal could be constructed 
between the branches of the Schuylkill and Susquehanna, and with this and the 
improvement of the rivers "it is thought an inland Navigation may be formed of 
vast extent and Benefit to the Province." — [VI, 313.] 

In January, 1773, Rittenhouse and Rhoades again reported in favor of a sys- 
tem of canals between the Delaware and Susquehanna, but the canals were 
not built and trade continued up and down the rivers instead of along eastern and 
western lines. 

^ Penna. Archives, IV, 362. " The Petition of sundry Inhabitants of the said 
Province most humbly sheweth, That a good waggon Road from the Forks of 
the Susquehanna to the nearest navigable waters of Schuylkill, hath long been 
considered as an object of the greatest Importance to the Prosperity of this 
Province." The route is then suggested, and it is said "the opening so good a 



TJie Groivth of the Revolution hi the West. 6"/ 

to bring the east and west again into close commercial rela- 
tionship. On February 9 the Council took this petition under 
consideration and appointed a commission to investigate the 
matter/ In April this commission presented a favorable 
report and it was ordered that the road "be forthwith opened 
and rendered commodious for Public Service." ^ On February 
20 the Governor also had laid before the Council a petition 
for a new and good road from Lancaster to Philadelphia, 
which " will be of great utility to the trade of Philadelphia, 
and to the back Inhabitants, by rendering carriage more safe 
and easy," A second committee was appointed to investi- 
gate this request, and on November 10 another report was 
laid before the Council recommending that this road also be 
constructed,' as it would be of" great utility and advantage to 
the City of Philadelphia, . . . beside suiting a number 
of people who now have no convenient Road to the said City," 
and the road was ordered to be opened. 

Other petitions also were favorably acted upon, as one from 
the inhabitants of Philadelphia, Bucks and Northampton 
counties for a road first asked for fifteen years before,* but it was 
much easier to secure favorable action by the Governor and 
Council than to obtain money for such purposes as this from 
the Assembly. An order from the executive for the con- 
struction of a highway meant merely that, if the towns through 
which the road was to pass wished to construct it at their 

communication by land . . . will afford the most advantageous route for 
carrying on a profitable Trade with the distant Northern and Western Indian 
Nations, and likewise be the means of bringing all the produce of the rich lands 
lying on and near those extensive and navigable waters [of the Susquehanna] at 
a cheap rate to the City of Philadelphia, which will thereby effectually promote 
the Commercial Interest of the City and Province." 

iCol. Rec, IX, 651. 

2 Col. Rec, IX, 666. 

»Col. Rec, IX, 657. 

*Col. Rec, IX, 703, 731. 



68 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

own expense, they could do so. The province bore none of 
the cost, and complaint was frequently made that, although a 
line might be made for a road, no road followed the line. In 
the Assembly it was held that the towns should not only keep 
in repair such roads as already existed, but should take it 
upon themselves to build new highways whenever they were 
considered necessary or helpful to their own interests. Fre- 
quently the Assembly would offer to appoint a committee which 
should oversee the expenditure of such sums as were raised 
by subscription, occasionally a lottery would be authorized, 
and rarely the Assembly would agree to contribute a sum 
equal to that raised by subscription, but a more liberal offer 
than this was seldom if ever obtained. Finally, in March, 
1775, a committee report was obtained in favor of provincial 
action, for then it was considered essential to bring the east 
and west into closer relations.^ One reason for the former 
lack of action on the part of the Assembly was given by 
"A Friend of Liberty" in the Pennsylvania Gazette." He 
declared that, although the trade of the western part of the 
State naturally went to Baltimore, disputes concerning where 
money should be expended had not only prevented consistent 
expenditure on roads to remedy the evil, but had discouraged 
all appropriations whatsoever.^ 

1 See Votes, VI, 448, 570. 

2 April 7, 1773. 

'For such disputes see Votes, VI, 552, and Col. Records, IX, 703. 

Against this policy energetic protest was made, especially when such roads 
were regular commercial highways from Philadelphia into the interior and used 
by her merchants for the maintenance of their trade. — [See the protests of Lan- 
caster County, Votes, VI, 21, and of Cumberland, VI, 30.] The Assembly, 
however, declined to act as the petitioners requested, but in 1772 the feeling 
of the necessity of the road to Lancaster being kept in repair if the trade with 
the west was not to be wholly lost prevailed, and the city of Philadelphia hav- 
ing granted /'500 the Assembly gave £1,000. This was followed in 1773 by a 
grant of ^200 for a road from Reading to Fort Augusta, but this seems to have 
been more for military purposes. 



TJic Grozvth of the Revolution in the West. 69 

On December 21, 1774/ a petition from Lancaster County 
was read to the Assembly, in which it was stated that " the 
Trade of the Western Parts of the Province has increased 
very greatly within these few years past, and the Roads neces- 
sary for the Transportation of Merchandize and the Product 
of the County are now almost unpassable ; that on account of 
the Inattention paid to public Highways, large Quantities 
of Grain, Flaxseed, Hemp, Iron and other Articles of Trade, 
are daily conveyed to Baltimore and other Parts of Maryland, 
which otherwise would naturally be sent to the Philadelphia 
Market," etc. " The Act passed in the Twelfth year of the 
Reign of his present Majesty is by no means adequate to 
the Purposes thereby intended, of opening, amending and 
keeping in Repair the public Roads and Highways . 
the Petitioners therefore most humbly pray," &c. To the 
same effect a petition was read December 23, 1774,^ "setting 
forth, that it is a melancholy Truth that a considerable share 
of the Trade of the Western Parts of this Province hath been 
of late diverted from the City of Philadelphia (where it is the 
general Interest of the Province its Trade should center) 
to Baltimore and other Parts of Maryland." "The reason 
for this is well known to the House, being the Danger, Ex- 
pense and Difficulty of crossing the Rivers Susquehanna and 
Schuylkill" 5 

One effort, indeed, had been made by the Assembly five 
years before to do away with the obstacle to trade furnished 

1 Votes, VI, 558. 

2 Votes, VI, 561. 

3 The Chronicle is one of the best papers in which to observe the complaint 
regarding this loss of trade to the city. During the year 1767 there are several 
articles by Q. Z., A. B. and others on the subject. Q. Z. in particular says that 
the trade is going to Baltimore and that roads must be straightened and ferry 
charges lessened if this evil is to be cured. Somewhat in the line of Q. Z.'s 
suggestion is the attempt of the Assembly in 1 769 to obtain a free ferry across the 
Schuylkill. 



JO The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

by poor ferriage, but the effort had failed. On January 9, 
1769, the Mayor had read to the City Council a message from 
the Assembly which showed an earnest desire to remedy the 
evil. The message consisted of the following vote, passed 
January 6 : ^ " Ordered that Messrs. Fox, Livezey, Pemberton, 
Chapman, Ashbridge, Pearson and Ross be a committee to 
inform the corporation that the House is desirous to facilitate 
and promote the trade of the City of Philadelphia, by making 
the middle ferry on the Schuylkill a free ferry, or otherwise to 
appropriate the nett proceeds to the Amendment of the roads, 
as shall be thought conduciv^e to the promotion of such 
trade ; and to confer with the said corporation respect- 
ing the sale of the said ferry to the public." The Corpora- 
tion appointed a committee, consisting of six members to 
confer with the Assembly on the subject, but for some reason 
the meeting was not held. In February the committee of 
the corporation recommended that the whole matter be post- 
poned until the Assembly was ready to act. That body, in 
its turn, thought that the city was not eager to do anything, 
and nothing resulted from the Assembly's action although 
the effort of each body was significant of the existing need. 

Aside from petitions for roads and canals there had been 
extensive movements for the improvement of river navigation. 
Ascribed by some to the desire of the wealthy people of the 
city to deprive the poor of the opportunity of fishing in the 
rivers, the agitation for the removal not only of dams but of 
the rocks and sandbars which hindered the trade along nearly 
all the streams of the colony, continued until action was 
finally secured. The demand for these improvements in the 
Schuylkill began as early as 1760. During the French war 
the safety as well as the trade interests of the interior counties 
required improved transportation facilities, and in March of 
that year a petition was presented to the Assembly asking for 
1 Votes, VI, 117. 



The Grotvth of the Revolution in the West. 71 

a committee of investigation. Letters favoring the project 
appeared in the press ^ and in September the committee 
reported that something be done. The result was a law 
providing that the colony would undertake to spend in the 
improvement of the river all the money that should be sub- 
scribed for that purpose and appointing agents to oversee the 
project.=^ The work thus begun was continued under a law 
of February 26, 1773, a new commission being selected to 
oversee the work which the first had been either unable or 
unwilling to complete.^ The real impetus to the improvement 
of river navigation, however, was not given until, as in the 
case of roads, the trade was felt to be slipping away. Even 
then the possible benefits were impaired by disputes about the 
manner of raising and expending the money necessary for the 
improvements. 

Two of the most important acts regarding inland navigation 
became law March 9, 1771. The first of these declared the 
rivers Delaware and Lehigh, parts of Neshaminey Creek, and 
the stream called Lechawaxin common highways, and made 
provision for their improvement. As in the other cases much 
of the benefit desired by the petitioners was lost by the 
provision that the money spent on improvement was not to be 
granted by the State, but was to be raised by subscription, a 

1 Penna. Gaz., April 3. 

2 March 14, 1761. 

3 Laws of Pa., Carey & Bioren, I, 366 ; II, 94- See, also, the Schuylkill act of 
February 26, 1773, C. & B., II, 26. 

Another petition for the improvement of the navigation of the Schuylkill was 
read in the Assembly January 1 1 , 1 77°. It declared that " your petitioners are of 
the opinion that if the River Schuylkill was made Navigable from its head 
branches to the City of Philadelphia, so that the produce of the country lying 
convenient thereto, may be transported to the Philadelphia market, it would be 
attended with great advantage to the public."— [Pa. Archives, IV, 360.] This 
petition was from Berks county. The petitioners considered that the expense 
should be borne by the merchants or by the province as a whole; they were by no 
means content with the half and half action of the law of 1761, for little 
advantage had as yet resulted from it. 



72 The Revolutionary Movemc7it i?t Pennsylvania. 

commission being appointed to receive and expend all moneys 
so raised/ By a similar act the Susquehanna, Juniata, Cones- 
toga, Bald Eagle, Machanoy, Penns Creek, Swatara, Conne- 
doguinet and Kiskiminetas were also classed as highways, 
but in addition it was carefully provided that no money should 
be spent farther south on the Susquehanna than Wright's 
Feriy lest the trade of Maryland might be more favored than 
that of Philadelphia.- In 1773 the Assembly^ offered to 
expend ;^ 1,000 on the improvement of the Susquehanna, 
again providing that an equal amount must first be raised by 
subscription and that no money be expended farther south 
than the ferry as in the former act. It is evident from these 
petitions and votes that the Assembly had at last become 
aware of the economic chasm dividing the east from the west 
and of the influence exerted by Maryland. Western Pennsyl- 
vania, indeed, was perfectly willing that the Susquehanna 
should be improved south as well as north of Wright's ferry. 
Another hint as to the commercial relations between the 
two colonies is given by the excise laws passed in the Phila- 
delphia Assembly.* So long as the tax upon liquors was con- 
fined to an import duty, smuggling was an easy method of 
avoiding this expense. Especially in the interior, it was found 
easy to evade the regulations because of the many places on 
Chesapeake Bay where goods could be illegally landed. With 
the imposition of internal taxation in 1771 it became more 
difficult to evade the law, and in consequence hard feelings 
arose against the Assembly which had enacted, and the 
Governor who administered the objectionable regulations. 
Attempts to defend the new measure only increased the differ- 
ences between the two sections of the colony by again making 
prominent the lack of racial and political unity, " Publicus " 

1 Carey & Bioren, I, 513. 

*C. & B., I, 516; Votes, VI, 302. 

' Act February 17. 

* March 21, 1772, Tower Coll., IX, 234. 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 73 

replying to those who said the law was unfair and its admin- 
istration unjust, contended^ that the excise officials dared not 
be unjust, for they were accountable to the Assembly, but 
this defence by no means satisfied those elements of the popu- 
lation who considered themselves insufficiently represented in 
that body or who were deprived of the right of suffrage. 
The officials might be responsible to those who made the law 
but they were not responsible to those among whom it was 
enforced. These differences were more vigorously excited 
by the attack which Publicus made upon the character of 
the opposition. "Who are those who raise this frightful 
clamor?" he asked. "They are strangers lately come among 
us, or Persons long practiced in the innocent frauds of cheat- 
ing the public of its revenues, or of those who wish to pro- 
mote the flourishing state of commerce in the neighboring 
Colonies from their connexions with them more than that of 
this province, or the poor and illiterate." . '. . "They 
wish the law to be laid on importations so that they can 
smuggle in from Baltimore." Is not this an additional bit of 
evidence as to the close relations existing between the north 
and south, and the lack of such connection between the east 
and west ? To this writer's attack on the more recent immi- 
grants came immediate reply. Publicus had called such 
people " Birds of Passage," and this designation aroused fierce 
resentment. " Several thousand inhabitants of this province, 
who, not having had the honor of being born in it, conse- 
. quently fall under the opprobrious denomination of ' Birds of 
Passage,' do present their most respectful compliments to 
Publicus and return him their thanks (for thinking that they 
esteem every country where they light as their own) and they 
further declare their utter abhorrence of those illiberal wretches 
who would cause distinctions destruction of harmony and 
universal benevolence between themselves and the children 
of those who were Birds of Passage before them." 

iPenn. Gaz., January 13, 1773. 



74 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

' Other evidences are not wanting of the increase in hostile feel- 
ing aroused between the two sections by this tax. The " Chron- 
icle " ^ contained petitions from the eastern portion of the colony 
in which complaint was made that not only was the west allowed 
to escape its proportionate share of the assessed taxes, but 
that in both direct and indirect taxation only a small amount 
of the quota due was collected. In reply attention was 
called to the large number of properties throughout the west 
advertised for sale because of unpaid taxes and it was claimed 
that the great aim of the eastern and wealthier section was 
to keep the frontiersmen poor and dependent upon the Dela- 
ware Counties.^ Comparing this attitude with the treatment 
he was receiving from the south, where efforts were made to 
accommodate him, the westerner gradually became convinced 
that prosperity could be attained only by the maintenance of 
trade connections with Maryland or by the establishment of a 
government at Philadelphia more regardful of western in- 
terests.^ 

1 February 8, 1 773. 

'Lists of such cases are given in the Pennsylvania Gazette for October 5, 
1769, and July 26, 1770. 

'There seems to have sprung up between Pennsylvania and the South dur- 
ing the early period the same system of illicit trade in liquors that was promi- 
nent later. In 1759 [Henning, VII, 265] the Virginia Assembly had imposed 
an import duty of one penny a gallon on imported liquors coming elsewhere 
than from England, but in 1769 \_Ibid., VIII, 335] the duty on all imported 
beer and ale was removed. Pennsylvania had an excise tax [Statutes at Large, 
IV, 308, Act of 1738] of four pence a gallon on all wine and spirits sold 
within her borders. It was, therefore, much more profitable to smuggle liquors 
across the line from the South than to import them through Philadelphia. (I 
have not been able to obtain the laws of Maryland regarding liquors.) In 
Pennsylvania, January 24, 1772 [Votes, VI, 357] the Assembly approved the 
resolution of its committee to extend the excise to "all Wine, Rum, Brandy and 
other Spirits sold or consumed in this Province," private distillation excluded, 
and for "preventing Frauds in the payment and collection of the Excise." — 
[Measure passed February 21, Votes, VI, 370], and when it was vetoed the 
House attempted to carry it by making the act for granting ;i^4,ooo dependent 
upon it. Finally the measures were separated and the Governor yielded. — [March 



The Growth of the Revolution in the West. 75 

If there was any such economic connection between western 
Pennsylvania and Baltimore as the preceding pages would 
imply, it must have furnished an additional reason for the 
estrangement existing between Philadelphia and the Susque- 
hanna Valley. Not only would the Germans and Irish be 
racially united to the population of northern Maryland, but 
they would be brought into close connection with the city of 
Baltimore. It would be difficult to say whether Maryland 
merchants were more democratic in their tendencies than were 
those of Philadelphia but they could hardly have been less 
so, and in all that related to England the southern colony 
occupied a position of more independence than did the north- 
ern one. By her original charter Maryland was entirely 
exempt from English taxation, and in the conflict with the 
proprietary influence all elements of the colony seem to have 
been recognized as entitled to equal political rights. There 
was a social aristocracy at Annapolis, but the Legislature was 
certainly more amenable to popular influence than was the case 
in Pennsylvania. At all events, the Pennsylvania farmer con- 
sidered the Maryland merchant as the one from whom he 
received money and the southern Assembly as a body which 
was improving the means by which his produce could be 
brought to market. So far as he was connected with the 
Philadelphia merchant, it was only to pay for articles pur- 
chased of traders from that city, and the Assembly was in his 
eyes a body which would neither assist trade by positive 
measures, protect it by defending the settlements from Indian 
raids, nor allow the western counties an adequate share in 
determining the policy of the colony. 

In the excitement of 1774 Baltimore was one of the fore- 
most exponents of democracy and resistance. On May 31a 

21, 1772.] The new law laid a duty on imports and provided that officers could 
search houses to find liquor illegally brought into the province, a provision which 
seems to have been suggested by the amounts which had been coming across the 
border from the South. 



76 The Rcvohitio7iary Movoncnt in Pennsylvania. 

town meeting assembled and recommended that a general 
congress, elected from the various counties, should meet in 
Annapolis and take such action as the occasion demanded. 
On June 22, ninety -two delegates so elected assembled in that 
city and took upon themselves the real governing power, 
although not formally doing so until 1775 (July 26). This 
action was so nearly duplicated in several other of the colonies 
that one can hardly speak of Maryland leading Pennsylvania, 
yet it may safely be said that hers w^as one of the influences 
which stimulated democracy and independence in the north- 
ern colony and that the growth of the economic connection 
between the Susquehanna Valley and Baltimore added to the 
feeling of estrangement existing between the Scotch Irish and 
the eastern oligarchy. Had race united the inhabitants of 
the frontier with Philadelphia or had the trade relations with 
that city been of vital importance there must have been a 
a friendlier spirit between them. When, however, to religious 
and racial differences we add an economic independence, there 
can be little wonder that the grievances arising from unpro- 
tected frontiers and disproportionate representation caused a 
determined effort on the part of the aggrieved party to make 
use of the first favorable opportunity to redress the wrong. 
Such an opportunity came in 1776, and this hostile feeling 
between the two sections cannot be disregarded if we are to 
understand the Pennsylvania revolution of that year.^ 

' Some of the references to the attempted improvement of trade facilities 
between east and west either by roads, canals, bridges or the improvement of 
rivers, are here given and a few petitions and votes are given in full. The refer- 
ences are to the Votes of the Assembly. 

V, 221, 495, 504, 515; VI, 21, 30, 119, 134 (this is in regard to bridges), 
152-53. 156, 206, 219, 275, 302, 313, 346, 351, 352, 448, 504, 519, 552 (dispute 
over location of a road), 558, 561, 565-66, 568 (a road to Northumberland 
County), 570, 572 (a road from the Susquehanna to the Ohio). See also Colonial 
Records, IX, 651, 657, 703, 731 ; Pennsylvania Archives, IV, 360, 362. 

Many of these references are to road connections within the colony and contain 
no mention of the Maryland roadway but they serve to show the lack of unity 
between east and west. The list is by no means exhaustive. 



CHAPTER V. 

The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in 
Philadelphia. 



Authorities. 



In the matter of authorities for the history of Philadelphia during the colonial 
period, it is difficult to draw any distinct line between those references which are 
valuable for state movements and those which treat of the city. Practically all 
the references given in the appendix contain material relating to municipal aftairs, 
and secondary authorities particularly are apt to treat city and colonial affairs as 
one. Among the sources relied upon, special attention may be called to West- 
cott's History of Philadelphia, as published in the Weekly Dispatch, and now 
in the Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania ; Scharf Sc Westcott's 
History of Philadelphia, 3 vols., 1884; Watson's Annals of Philadelphia and 
Pennsylvania, 2 vols., 1857 ; The Minutes of the Common Council, 1704-1776, 
Philadelphia, 1847 ; Marshall's Diary ; H. P. Rosenbach : The Jews in Phila- 
delphia prior to 1 800, and the volumes by Sharpless and by Shepherd already 
referred to. 

Coincident with the growth of the discontent throughout 
the Susquehanna Valley there was developing in the city of 
Philadelphia a spirit of hostility to Quaker domination, only 
less important than the Scotch-Irish antagonism. Although 
there was not the feeling of self-reliance among the discon- 
tented inhabitants of the city, which was found in the frontier 
communities, there were bitter rivalries in Philadelphia accom- 
panied by an extreme jealousy of the ruling aristocracy. It 
may fairly be doubted whether this opposition of the middle 
and lower classes to Quaker control would, of itself, have 
been able to make headway against the legal barriers which 
the sagacity of the early colonial leaders had erected ; but, 
Hke the German element throughout the west, the Philadel- 
phia populace became a valuable ally of the interior counties 
in their struggle against the dominant conservatism of the 

province. 

(77) 



78 TJie Revolutionary Movcnioit in Pennsylvania. 

By its indifference to the needs of the Susquehanna Valley 
the Assembly had not only allowed a profitable trade connec- 
tion to form between that section and the commercial centres 
of Maryland, but by its Indian policy and its determination 
to retain control of the provincial Assembly at any cost, the 
Quaker majority had changed the feeling of economic indif- 
ference prevalent among the newer counties into one of politi- 
cal hostility. In like manner the commercial methods and 
the social exclusiveness of the aristocracy throughout the 
east had aroused a feeling of jealousy among the middle and 
lower classes of Philadelphia. This aristocracy, said Frank- 
lin, ruled city as well as colony for its own benefit, and the 
accusation seemed justified by the restrictions placed upon the 
voting ability of citizens in both town and provincial elec- 
tions. 

So long as the possession of a fifty pounds personality or 
of a freeholding was a prerequisite for the exercise of the 
suffrage within the city, political power remained in the hands 
of the upper classes, and only the occasional divisions in the 
ranks of the majority enabled the mechanics and traders to 
obtain a voice in either city or colonial Assembly. When 
the rogues fell out just men obtained their dues, said the dis- 
satisfied members of the community, but they complained that 
the " Junto " rarely divided against itself. With the era of 
town meetings and extra legal conventions the common people 
realized their own importance. More than this, they learned 
how to make their influence felt. The international revolu- 
tion was their political opportunity and it was at once 
improved. Certain people declared with John Ross for neu- 
trality in the contest with Britain. According to Graydon, he 
" loved ease and Madeira much better than liberty and strife," ^ 
and said, " let who would be king, he well knew that he would 
be subject." The masses, however, thought that the revolu- 

^ Memoirs, p. 105. 



TJie Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 79 

tion would change their state of subjection to one of king- 
ship. Only by understanding this position can we compre- 
hend why the revolution against England, upheld "in its early 
stages by the most wealthy and respectable in Pennsylvania," 
was fought to its end by a different class. The Continental 
Congress may have met in Carpenters' Hall to obtain the 
support of the trades people, among whom the carpenters had 
the best organized union. Paine may have made the Ameri- 
can cause popular by bringing it down from a constitutional to 
a common sense level. But this was not enough. Unless 
there had been internal discontent it is doubtful if hostility 
to England, aroused by a sense of financial loss, would have 
continued after its financial occasion had been removed. 
Especially evident is this truth when we consider that the 
taxation gains were to be spent in America, and would be 
collected chiefly from the well-to-do. The arguraent advanced 
by Paine would serve as well against the provincial govern- 
ment of Pennsylvania as against the government of George 
III., and it was because the mechanics had no confidence in 
either, that " Common Sense " was so effective. An eye 
witness of the movement of 1776 considered it "scarcely 
necessary to mention, that the spirit of liberty and resistance 
drew into its vortex the mechanical interest, as well as that 
numerous portion of the community in republics, styled The 
People ; in monarchies, The Populace, or still more irreverently 
The Rabble, or Canaille." He did not think that this easy 
conquest by the spirit of liberty was due to any hostility of 
the people (except the Irish) against England. " The oppo- 
sition to the claims of Britain originated with the better sort. 
It was truly Aristocratic in its commencement . . . and among 
the lower ranks of the people . . . the true merits of the con- 
test were little understood or regarded." ^ By liberty the 

* Graydon, p. 107. 
^Graydon, p. 119. 



8o The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

people meant freedom from oligarchical rule within the colony, 
or, to quote Graydon once more, " anarchy since hallowed 
by the phrases of Equality and the Rights of Man." ^ 
Leveling principles were popular in Philadelphia, and were 
more influential in securing the overthow of Quaker govern- 
ment than was the lukewarmness of the Friends in support- 
ing military resistance. Indeed, the jealousy was evident 
within the army itself One company of the associators, 
recruited from the higher classes, was called by the populace 
the "Silk Stocking Company," which showed, says Graydon, 
how " the canker worm jealousy already tainted the infantile 
purity of our patriotism." 

As early as 1701 the Quakers had felt the danger of giving 
political equality to the masses. At that time immigration 
consisted largely of convicts and paupers from England, 
many of whom settled in the city. Although these new- 
comers were much superior to the convict class of to-day, the 
Friends had no intention of being ruled by them, and there- 
fore Philadelphia was given but two representatives in an 
assembly of twenty-six, and the suffrage requirements were 
placed so high within the city that only the wealthier citizens 
could vote for those. Since the same qualifications held for 
city as for state elections, both Council and Assembly were 
really controlled by the higher classes, and the people claimed 
that no legislation favoring middle class interests could be 
obtained. Especially was this complaint made against the 
city government which the merchant aristocracy was said to 
rule in promotion of private ends. ^ 

1 P. 107. 

'The following resolutions of "a number of Tradesmen," appeared in the 
Pennsylvania Gazette, September 27, 1770: " It has been customary for a cer- 
tain company of leading men to nominate persons and settle the ticket for assem- 
blymen, commissioners, assessors, etc., without even permitting the affirmative or 
negative voice of a mechanic to interfere, and, when they have concluded, to 
expect the Tradesmen to give a sanction thereto by passing the ticket ; this we 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 8 1 

One example of favoritism was repeatedly cited — the regu- 
lations adopted regarding vendues or auctions. This custom 
of selling commodities at auction was not peculiar to Pennsyl- 
vania, but in no other colony did its regulation excite greater 
antagonism between the various classes. Those who opposed 
the practice claimed that under the guise of selling goods to 
the poor more cheaply than they could be purchased of the 
regular merchants, designing men made these gatherings in 
reality places of rioting, and that the auctioneers fleeced the 
people instead of aiding them. In 1726 the yearly meeting of 
the Quakers protested that the managers of a vendue collected 
a number of people at their sale, and by a free distribution of 
liquor excited the bystanders to a spirit of rash bidding, and 
thus obtained exorbitant prices for the goods sold. In order 

have tamely submitted to so long that those gentlemen make no scraples to say 
that the Mechanics (though by far the most numerous, especially in this county) 
have no right to be consulted, that is, in fact have no right to speak or think for 
themselves. . . . We have as cautiously avoided putting the name of a 
Mechanic in our ticket for some years past as we could have been in putting in 
that of a Jevsr or a Turk. 

" But I would beg leave to ask have we not the same privileges and liberties to 
preserve or lose as themselves ? Have we not an equal right of electing or being 
elected ? If we have not the liberty of nominating such persons whom we 
approve, our freedom of voting is at an end, and if we are too mean a body to be 
consulted upon such a weighty an occasion, our ballot is not worth throwing in 
on the day of election. ... I have heard it often asserted that better and 
more wholesome laws were made in those times when men were elected for their 
uprightness and stability than those that have been made of late, since men have 
been elected on account of their greatness and opulency. 

" Are there no ingenious, cool, sensible men well acquainted with the Constitu- 
tion and lovers of their country among the Tradesmen and Mechanics ? God 
forbid ! " The writer then argues that such men are of reason better acquainted 
with the desires of the people, living as they do among them, and that electing 
wealthy men only increases their power in society. " Let us reflect on the dis- 
tress our parent country has brought not only upon herself, but on her American 
children through the same misconduct. It behooves us to be tenacious of such 
privileges, and by no means give up our liberties for the sake of a few smiles once 
a year," etc. 

•* A Brother Chip." 



82 TJie Revolutionary Movement in Pc7insylvania. 

to remedy this evil the Assembly in 1729 ' provided for the 
appointment of vendue masters by the <^ovcrnor on recom- 
mendation of the mayor, recorder and aldermen of the city ; 
that the persons so appointed should give bonds of not over 
five hundred pounds for the faithful execution of their duties, 
and that no persons, except the vendue masters, should be 
allowed to sell or to expose for sale by vendue or auction, in 
Philadelphia, any goods under penalty of fifty pounds forfei- 
ture. It is almost impossible to ascertain the justice or the 
injustice of this measure, but it seems reasonably certain that, 
unregulated, the system did promote occasional disorders. ^ 
The efforts of the merchants to restrain the practice still fur- 
ther would seem to indicate that vendues continued to cut into 
their trade, and the favor in which the system was held by the 
popular element would correspondingly indicate that auctions 
frequently lowered the prices of commodities. 

In 1 74 1 the merchants endeavored to obtain from the city 
council an ordinance which would prevent the sale of goods 
in small quantities even by the vendue masters. " The pub- 
lick vendues as now managed, by vending and retailing goods, 
wares, and merchandise in small quantities are very prejudicial 
and a great grievance to the trading part of the inhabitants of 
this city," said the merchants, and in response to their petition 
the council ordered " that the vendue masters for the future 

1 Statutes at Large, IV, 141. 

'The law of 1729 applied only to the city, and in 1743 a petition was sent to 
the Assembly from Chester County in which complaint was made that the profuse 
quantity of spirituous liquors given to the people in attendance, not only caused 
"poor people to give extravagant prices for unnecessary things whereby families 
were much oppressed and sometimes ruined," but also produced "swearing, 
quarreling and other scandalous enormities." In 1 75 2 also the vendue masters 
complained that in the Northern Liberties, a district distinct from the city proper, 
unauthorized vendues were set up "where goods were disposed of in small lots 
to the injury of regular vendue masters and of citizens." — See Westcott's 
History of Philadelphia, Chap. 132, from which many of the facts in the 
narrative are taken. 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 83 

do not sell any goods at vendue under the value of forty- 
shillings except wearing apparel or second-hand goods and 
such goods as are excepted by the law regulating vendues."' 

This was a step in advance, but the merchants were by no 
means satisfied while wearing apparel was excluded from the 
ordinance of the council or while the regulation affected the 
city alone. Quite large districts, really a part of Philadelphia, 
were under a separate jurisdiction and the merchants wished a 
state law. In 1752 it was urged in a petition to the Assembly 
" that at present the vendues being no other than retail shops 
and held in public places are very injurious to all regular 
dealers, whether mechanics or shopkeepers.^ From this it is 
easily seen that the rivalry was felt by the merchants although 
we can only surmise the effect of that rivalry upon the prices 
paid by the consumer. 

No further advantage was gained by legal enactment, how- 
ever, and in 1770 the merchants endeavored to overthrow the 
auction system by other means. In April the shopkeepers 
agreed that they would purchase at vendue no lot of goods 
sold for less than five pounds except merchandise which, 
because of its bulk, could not be handled in high priced lots. 
Woolen goods must be sold by the piece as imported and iron 
goods in packages of not less than a dozen articles. They 
further agreed to boycott all vendue masters who sold goods 
to persons not signing this agreement or who bought merchan- 
dise in violation of the compact. Put in modern terms, this 
action was nothing else than the formation of a trust. All 
small sales, except by the regular dealers, were virtually pro- 
hibited for no vendue master dared to offend the class which 
controlled the politics as well as the trade of the city. At 
once protests came from the poorer citizens and an outcry 
arose against the monopolistic tendencies of the commercial 

'Minutes of the Common Council, 1704-1776, p. 410. 
2 Votes, V, 206. 



84 The Revolutionary Movement in Pejmsylvatiia. 

aristocracy. The importance of these protests is witnessed 
by the fact that in spite of the violence attendant upon the tea 
episode in 1773, this anti-trust clamor retained its reputation 
as a climatic outburst down to the revolution.^ 

Notwithstanding these restrictions, the sales by vendue con- 
tinued to disturb the merchants. In 1772 the agitation was 
renewed and articles for and against the system were frequent 
in both press and pamphlet literature. Among others, " Pro- 
bus," "J. M. H." and " Probitas " published tracts in the 
newspapers and many of their fellows sent petitions to the 
Assembly. The auction rooms were said to be the resort of 
idlers and that "inasmuch as the names of persons sending 
goods to the vendue master were never publicly known, 
fraud and dishonesty were encouraged and much money went 
out of the province to people of other colonies sending goods 
to this metropolis for sale." This last argument appealed 
especially to the jealousy of Baltimore prevalent among the 
Philadelphia merchants. If the southern city had succeeded 
in winning the western provincial trade from Philadelphia, its 
merchants must not be allowed to take the money nor to 
interfere in the business of the eastern counties. In response 
to this sentiment, the Assembly passed a measure more closely 
regulating the auction system," but the governor, either because 
he considered the practice a benefit to the community, or 
because he regarded the vendue masters, appointed by him- 
self, as entitled to his protection, refused his assent to the pro-, 
posed legislation and the practice continued as before. 

In one business there existed a bar to the introduction of 
vendues. Down to 1772 bookselling seems to have been a 
strict monopoly. When Robert Bell petitioned for the privi- 
lege of selling books at auction ^ he was promptly opposed by 

iPenna. Gaz., vSept. 7, I774' 
'Votes, VI, 449. 
'Votes, VI, 369. 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia, 8 5 

the six other firms of the city and for two years he was 
unable to secure the privilege. The general system, with its 
accompanying restrictions, appears to have been retained until 
1777 and whatever may have been the merits of the dispute 
or of the disputants, the controversy served to intensify the 
jealousies and hard feelings already existing between the two 
sections of the community. 

Another grievance against the merchants was found in the 
system of itinerant trade prevalent throughout the colony. 
At the same time that the Assembly had attempted to regu- 
late vendues, it had also declared that all pedlars dealing in 
goods not the product of the colony should be licensed and 
placed under close supervision.^ Under cover of this statute 
it was claimed that the merchants, as in the case of auctions, 
endeavored to monopolize the trade of the colony for their 
own benefit. Not only did the license fees (15 to 25 shiUings 
and a bond of 40 pounds) tend to raise prices, but their con- 
trol of the governmental machinery, so it was urged, enabled 
the merchants to prevent other than their own representatives 
obtaining a license. Thus, under pretext of obtaining com- 
pensation for the license fees, the monopolists were enabled 
to raise prices as high as their own interests demanded.^ 
Throughout the west these complaints were not so numerous, 
for there the eastern mercantile interests did not control the 
local machinery of government nor was it possible to prevent 
evasions of the law, but in the east this grievance, if we may 
judge from the grumbling of the people, was severely felt. 

Such opposition as was caused by measures of this char- 
acter may be called business hostility. In the social world 
dissensions were no less marked. Much might have been 
done socially to conciliate many of the mechanics and smalt 

1 Statutes at Large, IV, 141. 

« For such complaints as these, see the Pa. Gaz. of January 23, February 6, and 
August 19, 1772. 



86 The Revolutionary Movemetit in Pennsylvania. 

tradesmen but no attempt in this direction seems to have been 
made. Economic oppression, either real or fancied, ahenated 
the men, and social inequalities alienated their families. Thus, 
to the opposition of what Graydon called the Canaille, was 
added the discontent of the middle classes. ^ In the social 
world the lines were strictly drawn. " The dancing Assembly 
among the gentry had high vogue," said Watson, ^ " par- 
taking, before the revolution, of the aristocratic feelings of 
a monarchical government and excluding the families of 
mechanics however wealthy." So far indeed had the jealousy 
of this so-called gentry and aristocracy gone that suspicions 
were entertained against any proposition emanating from them. 
In particular instances the opposition aroused seems almost 
ludicrous in its character. Close examination was given to 
the most commonplace measures introduced into the legisla- 
ture, for only by such attention, it was claimed, could the ring- 
ruled Assembly be prevented from enacting class legislation. 
An instance of the suspicion of the ruling authorities is 
found in connection with the colonial fishery regulations. As 
early as 1 763 measures had been passed by the Assembly 
regulating the catching of fish in the streams passing through 
the colony, but they were not to become operative until the 
neighboring provinces, bordering upon the same rivers, had 
taken similar action. By 1 769 the necessary legislation had 
been enacted in New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, and, 
accordingly, the governor issued a proclamation declaring the 

1 Another example of the jealousy with which every action of the merchant 
classes was regarded may be seen in the clamor aroused in June, 1773. over the 
erection of additional markets. It was proposed to build them between Third 
and Fourth streets in Philadelphia, and the cry at once arose that such additions 
as those proposed would still further concentrate trade in the hands of a few and 
thus put "the people's liberties in danger of being swallowed up." Not one 
large market but several small ones, was the popular demand. As is the case 
in our own day, the cry was raised that small shops were in danger of being driven 
out of existence. 

2 Archives, II, 276. 



The Oration of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 8y 

acts of 1763 in force/ Under these acts the use of nets, 
dams, baskets and all other methods of fishing which in any- 
way interfered with the free navigation of the rivers was for- 
bidden under penalty of twenty pounds fine or six months 
imprisonment. This act was considered by the masses as 
aimed at their right to fish and it was very unpopular. In 
defiance of protest it was followed, in 1771, by an act for the 
preservation of rock fish, oysters, etc. The publication and 
enforcement of these regulations excited much opposition and 
it was urged that in default of votes by which they might 
influence legislation, poor people must have recourse to arms 
if they wished to obtain their due share in the privileges 
enjoyed by the rest of the community.^ A benevolent oli- 
garchy would care for all classes of the people, and if the con- 
servatives who controlled the province of Pennsylvania would 
not do the same then they had no just claim for a continuance 
of their power. Other people ought to be given a share in 
the government. 

Among other pleas in behalf of the non-voting classes, 
one may be given from the Gazette of June 7, 1770: 
"The many elaborate performances lately circulated in the 
public papers have probably in some measure gained the 
attention of great numbers in the American Colonies to the 
great cause LIBERTY. It may, therefore, be acceptable at 
this time to see something further offered on that subject 
which has not been generally taken notice of. As Liberty is 
one of the greatest temporal blessings, it ought to be preserved 
sacred and inviolable in preference to all other considerations. 
If this was generally our sentiments and practice, it would 
doubtless very much advance the common cause, if we could tell 
our superiors that we ask no more than we give. . . . 
Altho Foreigners coming into an English Government with 

1 Archives, III, 347. 

•Pennsylvania Gazette, April 4, 11, and August 15, 1771. 



88 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

mercenary views may not be entitled to all the privileges of 
English subjects yet surely the case is very different respect- 
ing those brought among us against their wills. Have they 
not a right to enjoy their Birth-rights in their native land or in 
the Government where they are placed? Should they be 
taxed without their consent and without being represented ? 
Should they be tried for crime otherwise than by their peers 
or at least without a jury (two mighty points of complaint in 
our own case) ? Is it reasonable to separate the families of 
such and take the profits of their labor for the purpose of 
raising a Revenue for ourselves and for our children ? It may 
be worthy of consideration whether we have a better right to 
lay impositions on them we esteem our inferiors than the 
Parliament of Great Britain have, for what they have done to 
us ? If upon a serious and impartial examination we find 
that we have in any degree violated the sacred principles of 
Liberty let us ingenuously acknowledge our mistakes and do 
everything in our power to restore that invaluable blessing 
to all we are concerned with, which may be a means of 
inciting our superiors to act on the same principles and render 
us more acceptable to him who ' made of one blood all nations 
of men ' and now commands ' all things whatsoever ye would 
that men should do to you do ye even so to them.' A 
Friend to Liberty." 

As in the case of the controversy regarding auctions or 
merchant pedlars, the blame may be placed in accordance 
with our sympathies or judgments. Nothing, however, is 
more certain than that in these and other like ways dissensions 
were being aroused within the city and that they played an 
important part in later colonial history. 

The charges against the aristocracy as a class controlling 
legislation and trade, with eyes intent upon their own inter- 
ests alone, were reinforced by attacks made upon the lawyers 
and upon particular individuals among the gentry. It was 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia, 89 

urged that when an ordinary person had a just claim against 
the government he could obtain redress only by sharing that 
claim with an influential lawyer or merchant. If his case 
was a just one the plain citizen would be approached by some 
person of influence and told that no redress could be expected. 
Then a professedly benevolent gentleman, pitying his mis- 
fortunes, would offer the claimant immediate pecuniary relief 
and take the chances of ever being reimbursed. Having thus 
deceived the original claimant and secured the rights in the 
case for himself, the new holder of the claim by merely pre- 
senting his case to the officials or by a deal with the assem- 
blymen would at once obtain full redress and the profits of 
the transaction would be shared among the participants in the 
deal.i 

The leaders of the Assembly professed to believe that 
all opposition came from the mob element. Against this 
charge the mechanics and tradesmen protested. They had 
grievances as well as the lower classes, but they differed from 
that element in that they would not descend to violent meas- 
ures in support of their claims. One of these protests, printed 
in the Gazette of August 19, 1772, read as follows : 

"7c» the printers of tJie Pennsylvania Gazette : 

''Gentlemen — A number of respectable Tradesmen, Mechan- 
ics, etc., freemen of the City and County of Philadelphia having 
been severely censured for these two or three years past, espe- 
cially at the two last annual elections of Representatives, . . . 
for no other reason but acting according to their judgments, 
and it having been urgently represented that their intention 
was to oppose the old and established friends to this govern- 
ment and to introduce innovations, . . , you are there- 
fore requested to communicate to the public . . . the 
following fundamental articles unanimously agreed to by a 

^ Pennsylvania Chronicle, August 23-30, 1773. 



90 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

society composed of the aforesaid Tradesmen, Mechanics, etc., 
and now called the Patriotic Society. ' Whereas, we, the sub- 
scribers Tradesmen, Mechanics and Freemen of the City and 
County of Philadelphia have heretofore been connected with 
divers others of our Fellow Tradesmen of the said City and 
County in good fellowship and harmony with a sincere and 
upright intention of assisting by all prudant and lawful ways 
and means, our fellow inhabitants of the Province of Pennsyl- 
vania in support of our just rights and liberties as by law and 
the charter of the province established, and for preventing any 
innovation, infringement or violation of the same, or a?iy venal 
or corrupt practices to obstruct the freedom of voting at our 
annual elections . . . we have thought expedient to enter 
into a more firm and established Union in order (as much as 
in us lies) to effect the above said good purposes and7ipon any 
emergency, others of a similar nature. We do, therefore, 
unanimously agree : 

" ' I. That we will consistent with the good faith of true and 
legal subjects of George III., King of Great Britain, etc., 
endeavor to promote the Good and Welfare of the said King 
his person and Government a7td our fcllozv subjects, and pre- 
serve inviolate our just Rights and Privileges to us and our 
Posterity against every attempt to violate or infringe the same, 
either here or on the other side of the Atlantic. 

" ' II. That we will jointly and unanimously endeavor to 
support the happy form of government granted by charters to 
this province and especially the inestimable privilege of 
chusing our own Representatives and other officials by ballot, 
unbiased and uninfluenced by any other motive than esteem- 
ing the several candidates uncorrupted and disinterested, hav- 
ing the preservation of the Liberties and Privileges of their 
constituents at Heart. 

" ' III. That we will not let the fact that a measure is pro- 
posed by a person outside our Society influence us. . . . 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in PJiiladelphia. 91 

" ' IV. Neither any private pique or animosity. 

" < V. That the majority of the Society shall prevail if not 
altogether agreeable to our private sentiments. 

" ' VI. That debates of the Society on subjects and persons 
shall not be divulged.' "^ 

In spite of such protests by the middle classes, there can be 
no doubt that means less reputable than caucuses and resolu- 
tions were adopted to overawe the aristocratic faction, and 
when the Continental Congress gave the sticklers for legality 
an opportunity to unite, there was little difficulty in forming a 
coalition. At least as early as 1770 there had been assertions 
of power by the poorer classes^ and the conservatives in 
Philadelphia attempted to detract from the influence of the 
Massachusetts delegates to the Continental Congress by rep- 
resenting them as " wholly dependent on popularity with the 
lowest vulgar for a living." This element came into great 
prominence at the time of the excitement regarding the tea 
ships, and while the majority of the middle class sided with 
the mob in their opposition to the landing of the tea, it is 
doubtful whether a fear of violence was not the controlling 
motive in the minds of some among the merchants. Thus, 
when " Pacificus," in the Pennsylvania Gazette (September 
22, 1773), spoke of the dissensions among the people, the rapid 
growth toward turbulence and malignancy, and asked for "a 
meeting of the moderate, sensible and reputable freeholders 
and electors of this City without any distinction of party," to 
choose representatives and decide upon the method of action 
to be taken in that time of emergency, many protests were at 
once heard. In the Chronicle (September 20-27) " Mechanic " 
asserted that it was only through necessity and fear that the 
merchants and aristocrats were found supporting any popular 
movement. It was because America had been so thoroughly 

1 Pennsylvania Gazette, August I9, 1772. 

* Amicus Public!, in the Gazette, December 20, 1770. 



92 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

aroused to the injustice with which she was treated and because 
the "Junto" feared that it would be overwhehiied unless it 
took the side of that people, that the Aristocrats showed 
symptoms of vigor. " When vermin begin to croak we may- 
conclude that the rays of the sun have become favorable to 
their approaches and when we see scouting parties from the 
* Cupboard Club ' crawling forth from their dark ambushes 
under the disguise of ' Friends of their Country/ ' Lovers of 
Concord,' etc., we may rationally argue that the State is in 
danger." Beware how such leadership be accepted, was the 
burden of the popular clamor. No good will come to the 
city or colony so long as these people lead, for their real 
object is to retain their leadership. With what seems a strik- 
ing prophecy of the events in 1775 and 1776, the writers 
urged that unless the aristocrats could retain their position of 
leadership they would not advocate any decisive measures, 
" Pacificus dreading the consequence of another struggle 
which might prove fatal to his hopes and wishes, steps forth 
under a mask, begs a truce and a Congress in order — it is 
imagined — to deceive and cajole the honest freemen and free- 
holders " {i. c, the voters) "into some measures whereby the 
' Junto ' may regain that power and influence which they are 
losing with regret and used so ill." . . . " One caution, 
therefore, only remains and that is that they [his fellow towns- 
men] would beware of the ' Junto ' and all those whose 
pride and affected dignity place them above the reach of their 
instructions and render them callous to those tender feelings 
that men of a middle rank will always have for their constitu- 
ents."^ 

iln line with the caution of " Mechanic" was the following from the Gazette 
of September 22, 1773, in regard to the election for Assemblymen. It was 
signed " Citizen," and prayed that representative men be chosen " to counterplot 
the tyrannical schemes of a wicked and corrupt ministry whose emissaries or men 
influenced by the same spirit are not scarce among us." . . . " Men who 
would be fond of representing you, not to do you real service, but for their own 



The Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 93 

So severe were these feelings of jealousy and dislike of the 
upper classes that even when the merchants refused to accept 
the tea which had been consigned them it was asserted that 
the threats of the town meeting had been the real cause of 
their action. That gathering of over eight thousand men 
resolved that a committee be appointed to see those merchants 
to whom the tea was assigned and to induce them to resign 
their positions/ and of Wharton's action the Chronicle, in its 
issue for the same week, remarked: "The printer of this 
paper thinks it incumbent on him to mention, on this occasion, 
that Mr. Thomas Wharton Sr. prudently took the hints that 
have been given him and hath actually made a decent renun- 
ciation of his dangerous and disgraceful office of tea commis- 
sioner so that he is now despised somewhat less than he used 
to be, and at the same time the printer hopes he will not 

emolument, despise you ; these say : it is time the Tradesmen were checked— 
They take too much upon themselves. They ought not to intermeddle in State 
affairs. They ought to be kept low. They will become too powerful. When 
gentlemen of character and in office among us can dare to express themselves to 
this purport, men whose ancestors two generations ago were on an equality with 
some of the meanest of us, what may we expect? The laborious Farmer and 
Tradesman are the most valuable branches of the community and have for 
ages been the support and barrier of liberty as their patrimony and greatest riches 
and in this case are people of the first consequence," . . . "Every election should 
be considered as voting in a new Assembly. The consideration that such or such 
a gentleman has represented us for several years is vague in itself. Let us con- 
sider what he has done (for it is vain to fill the house with ciphers)." . . • 
" I doubt not that you will conduct yourselves with spirit, moderation and candor ; 
and display to your adversaries that men who in the sweat of their brows eat their 
bread are capable of sound judgment and prudence. " The j ealousy of the so-called 
"Junto" is also well seen by an article from the Chronicle of October II-18, 
1773, in which Wharton is attacked as follows : "We hear that Thomas Wharton 
Sen. commonly called the Marquis of New Barrataria, formerly one of the printers 
of this City (but generally officiated in the character of Devil in the office he was 
concerned in) . . . is appointed an agent of the East India Company for 
the sale of their teas in America so that if the inhabitants of this City sacrifice their 
birth right for a sup of tea this agent may become (what he hath often prophesied) 
a very great man indeed." 
I Gazette, October 20, 1773. 



94 T^J^<^ Rcvolntionavy Movement in Pennsylvmiia. 

for the sake of rendering this single virtuous act the more 
conspicuous let it stand alone." 

Those members of the Aristocracy who were not merchants 
were usually lawyers, and for these the populace had, if pos- 
sible, a greater dislike than for the commercial classes. Espe- 
cially if they had been educated abroad, the popular feeling 
was that they had lost their community of interest with the 
colony, and particularly with those who had not the advan- 
tage of wealth, high birth or political influence. Thus in an 
address to the voters in 1772,^ concerning their choice of rep- 
resentatives, "A. P." warns them not to choose "weak men, 
awkward speakers, hypocrites, beggars, placemen, and, above 
all, do not choose a lawyer." , . . "They are generally 
pricking fellows, maintainers of false suits, accustomed to let 
out their tongues and talent for hire, to call good evil, and 
evil good, to defend guilt and declaim against innocence, just 
according as they are paid by their employers. A man that 
hath no other standard of right or wrong than the largeness 
of the fee he receives from his client is certainly a very 
improper person to be intrusted with the Safety of a State or 
the honour of a Province." 

This distrust of the aristocracy continued until the revo- 
lution itself In the Evening Post of April 30, 1776, "A 
Tradesman " declared that the reason merchants opposed 
independence was because they had formed " a family com- 
pact of Pennsylvania." "They get all the profit and will soon 
reduce and control the people as the East India Company 
controls Bengal." " They have protested against and denied 
the authority of the patriotic committees who try to keep 
prices down." " They have openly said they would fight 
rather than agree to independence, and that the patriots of the 
State ought not to complain if they are finally hung." 

To counteract the influence of the merchants, trade guilds 

1 Gazette, September 22. 



TJic Creation of a Revolutionary Party in Philadelphia. 95 

were formed and efforts were made to lower the suffrage 
requirements in the city. Petitions were also presented to the 
legislature for admission to the hall of Assembly at all times, 
" as is the custom of the Hon. House of Commons in Great 
Britain and elsewhere in his Majesty's Dominions," ^ but they 
were usually refused. In 1774,^ as a partial concession, the 
Assembly voted that at times outsiders might be admitted, but 
whenever it was urged that such a time had come the motion 
to admit the people was defeated.' Efforts were also made to 
increase the representation of the city in the Assembly, but 
unless all people were allowed to vote such a concession 
would only increase the conservative power, so that this prop- 
osition received little radical favor, and not until the question 
of suffrage qualification was satisfactorily determined did the 
radicals in the city and in the west unite on the question of 
increased representation. 

With the rise of the revolutionary spirit throughout the 
colony came the committee and convention system, in which, 
as in the town meeting demonstrations, old methods of 
suffrage were discarded. Full suffrage became regarded as 
of great importance. " For these seven years past," remarked 
a writer in the Evening Post,* " the aristocrats have not con- 
descended to look on the ordinary person except at election 
time." " Be freemen and you will be companions for gentle- 
men annually." But if the popular forces had not been able 
to vote " for these seven years past " their discontent had been 
made effective through the use of extra legal methods. In 
the associators they at length found the means of making 
their will felt in the community, and the effect of that move- 
ment can be seen by tracing the responses which the Assem- 

1 February 25, 1764, Votes, V, 320. 

* October 19, Votes, VI, 550. 

^e. g., March 4, X775, Vote of 18-13. 

* April 27, 1776. 



g6 TJie Revolutionary Movcnieiit in Pemisylvatiia. 

bly made to the suggestions of the mihtary. With the radical 
leaders supported by the Continental Congress, by an almost 
solidly democratic sentiment throughout the west, and an 
equally strong sentiment among the masses in the city of 
Philadelphia, there is little wonder that the Quaker Counties 
could not resist the democratic movement of 1776. It is a 
mistake, however, to reckon the beginning of this movement 
for independence in Pennsylvania with the coming of the Con- 
tinental Congress, or with the intrusion of any outside influ- 
ence. As the racial, religious and economic differences had 
existed between England and America for a century before 
the declaration of independence, so the same differences 
between eastern and western Pennsylvania existed long 
before the overthrow of the Assembly and the Charter Gov- 
ernment. As the riotings and demands of the populace in 
England gave evidence of a smouldering discontent with the 
suffrage laws long before the passage of any reform bill, so 
the dissatisfaction with the eastern oligarchy in Pennsylvania 
existed long before the grant of universal suffrage under the 
Constitution of 1776. The colonial revolution in Philadel- 
phia, and in the colony at large, would have occurred had 
there been no national movement, but the latter uprising fur- 
nished the opportunity and suggested the means of accom- 
plishing the change. 



CHAPTER VI. 
The Opening of the Conflict. 



Authorities. 

The best secondary accounts of the Indian troubles at Conestogoe are in Shep- 
herd, Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania ; Sharpless, A Quaker Experi- 
ment; Gordon, History of Pennsylvania and the County Histories. The sources 
on which these accounts rest are the Votes of Assembly ; the official correspond- 
ence of the colony, and the newspapers and pamphlets of the period. The best 
list of pamphlets is in Hildebum, Issues of the Pennsylvania Press, although it 
does not include everything bearing on the subject. The following are among 
the most important contemporary discussions : 

An Historical Account of the Late Disturbance between the Inhabitants of 
the Back Settlements of Pennsylvania and the Philadelphians. Phila., 1764. 

The Plain Dealer or a few Remarks upon Quaker Politics and their Attempt 
to Change the Government of Pennsylvania. Phila., 1764. 

The Quaker Unmasked or Plain Truth. By David James Dove, Phila., 
1764. 

A Battle, A Battle, A Battle, A Squirt, Where no Man is killed and no Man 
is hurt. Phila., 1764. 

The Quakers' Address Versified. Phil., 1764. 

King Wampum or Harm Watch, Harm Catch. Phila., 1764. 

In Defence of the Quakers. 

The Quakers Assisting to Preserve the lives of the Indians in the Barracks 
vindicated. Phila., 1764. 

A Looking Glass for Presbyterians. Phila., 1764. 

A Dialogue Containing Some Reflections on the late Declaration and Remon- 
strance of the Back Inhabitants of the Province of Pennsylvania. Phila., 1764. 

A Letter from a Gentleman in Transilvania to his Friend in America. By 
Isaac Hunt. New York, 1764. 

The Substance of an Exercise had this Morning in Scurrility Hall. By 
Isaac Hunt. Phila., 1765. 

The Paxtoncade. A poem. Phila., 1764. 

In Defense of the Quaker Action at Paxton Massacre. Phila., 1764. 

A Serious Address to such of the Inhabitants of Pennsylvania as have con- 
nived at or do approve of the late Massacre. Phila., 1764. 

Remarks on the Quaker Unmasked. Phila., 1764. 

7 (97) 



98 TJic Rcvolntio7iary Movement m Pennsylva7iia. 

A Declaration and Remonstrance of the distressed and bleeding Frontier 
Inhabitants of the Province of Pennsylvania, presented by them to the hon- 
orable the Governor and Assembly of the Province, shewing the Causes of their 
late Discontent and Uneasiness and the Grievances under which they have labored 
and which they humbly pray to have redressed. Phila., 1764. 

A narrative of the late Massacres in Lancaster County of a Number of 
Indians, Friends of this Province by Persons Unknown, with Some Observations 
on the Same. Phila., 1764. 

No better accounts of the Proprietary-Crown conflict will be found than those 
given by Shepherd and Sharpless, and the merits of the two parties may be well 
studied in the writings of Franklin, Galloway and Dickinson. These authorities, 
with the press and pamphlet literature of the time have been the author's reli- 
ance. 

From our review of conditions in Pennsylvania we should 
expect to see the two opposing forces, one radical the other 
conservative, coming gradually into conflict. Into this opposi- 
tion each party had been forced by the logic of events, for 
each sought its own advantage and the opposing forces had 
few common interests. At first the conflict centred about the 
governor. The Quakers saw in him the most formidable bar 
to their complete control of the colony, but although the 
frontiersman had little love for the Penn family to which his 
rent was payable, he had still less affection for the Quakers 
who would not aid him against the Indians. Thus, as indi- 
viduals, the Scotch-Irish opposed the governor, but as a politi- 
cal party they rallied to his support. The definite alignment 
came in 1764, when the Friends endeavored to regain the 
ascendancy lost during the war with the French. 

At the conclusion of the peace of Paris, the affairs of the 
colony were in confusion and the future division of parties was 
not easily foreseen. Before then the westerners had wrangled 
with the proprietary concerning the possession of the lands on 
which they had settled ; with the Assembly at Philadelphia 
concerning their titles to land over which Indian tribes wan- 
dered, and with the French concerning the right of their 
respective governments to the whole territory. The Assem- 
bly had quarreled with the proprietaries as to the amount of 



The Opening of the Conflict. 99 

taxation which the lands of the Penn family should bear, and 
with New York, Virginia and Maryland as to their respective 
boundary lines. 

An added source of confusion was the royal proclamation 
of October 7, 1763, which forbade the colonists to settle on 
the lands newly conquered from France, and which even 
reserved some territory on which settlements had already been 
made. By this proclamation ^ the western portions of the 
territory taken from France were divided into royal provinces, 
and between them and the Atlantic slope a large tract was 
reserved for the Indians. At once the Quakers in the east 
and the Presbyterians in the west found a reason for union 
against England, although they continued to disagree in 
colonial politics. The westerners were dispossessed of lands on 
which settlements had already been made, and of the prospects 
of extending those settlements. The easterners' found their 
plans for land speculation balked and their Indian trade 
menaced. Before the peace had been proclaimed the Phila- 
delphia merchants had learned that England would not this 
time as formerly abandon her American conquests for com- 
pensation in Europe, and they had formed companies for the 
purpose of buying Indian claims, or securing royal concessions 
of land to be resold at a considerable profit. ^ 

While both colonial factions were angered by the English 
proposal, the frontiersmen found in the declaration an addi- 
tional cause for disliking the Quakers. Some affected to 
believe that the English policy of exclusion was the result of 
the attitude taken by the provincial Assembly in refusing to 
support war measures. The eastern commercial ring had 
been so eager to remain on good terms with the Indians, and 
thus be in a position, whatever the outcome of the war, to 

1 Published in the Pennsylvania Gazette, December 8, 1763. 

2 Among other such companies were the New Wales Company and the Vandalia 
Company. See their advertisements in the press of April, 1763, and the Corres- 
pondence of Wharton. 



Lcf 



I oo The Revohiiionmy Movement in Pe7insylva7iia. 

obtain favors from them, that they had aroused the hostiHty 
of the Crown toward the colony, and as a result a valuable 
strip of territory which might have been secured was lost. 
Others asserted that the project of a neutral zone originated 
with the Quakers. At the time of General Braddock's expe- 
dition that denomination had tried to persuade the English 
commander to make peace with the I'rench and to leave 
neutral ground between the two nations on which the Indians 
might live in peace. ^ Here was where the British govern- 
ment obtained the idea of a neutral zone ; and when the same 
party was found urging Crown government for the colony, it 
was claimed that the land speculators were seeking in this 
contemptible manner to curry favor with the English authori- 
ties that they might secure an entrance in spite of proclama- 
tions into the reserved lands. The Quakers, however, 
asserted that it was the fault of the proprietary that the right 
of settlement had been taken away and urged their own losses 
in proof of their innocence. 

This attempt to fix responsibility for financial loss, with the 
dangers expected from Indian settlements on reserved ter- 
ritory, led to a double conflict : First, a determined attempt 
was made by the rulers of the Assembly to throw off the 
proprietary authority altogether. This project was actively 
opposed by the Presbyterians of the east, led by Dickinson, 
and was fought with unreasoning hostility by the west, which 
opposed eveiything which the Quaker majority favored. The 
second struggle was that of the frontiersmen to control the 

^ The proposal had made the Virginians very angry at the time, for the land 
which was to be left free to the Indians was that which Quaker merchants had 
already purchased from the Indian tribes, and they would in this manner have 
had their title secured. See The Expedition of Major-General Braddock to 
Virginia, . . . being Extracts of Lettfers from an Officer to his Friend in London. 
There is an amusing comparison of the " fat, well-fed Quakers " and the " lean, 
half-starved Virginians," which illustrates the popular opinion regarding the two 
groups of settlers. 



V 



The Opening of the Conflict. lOi 

Indian policy of the colony in spite of any sentimental con- 
siderations which might be held by the east. The first battle 
was fought in both press and Assembly and resulted in Frank- 
lin's mission to England with a petition that the Crown would 
assume all governmental powers of the proprietors. The 
second was fought in the press and in the field, and resulted 
in the Conestogoe massacre and an organized if not a vic- 
torious west. Both contests must be regarded as the occasion 
or, perhaps better, the expression of a sectional and religious 
hostility that could no longer be restrained. The proprietary 
struggle engaged the leaders of political thought throughout 
the colony and was the beginning of the end of Quaker gov- 
ernment. From the settlement of the colony the eastern 
counties of Philadelphia, Chester and Bucks had controlled 
the Assembly as against any opposition which the western 
interests could arouse, and it was only as the proprietor sup- 
ported that section that any restraint could be placed on 
eastern domination. Of late certain actions of the extreme 
party in the Assembly had alienated some of the more fair- 
minded residents of the eastern counties, yet the commercial 
aristocracy, by admitting the wealthier Germans into their 
councils, had retained control. 

Of this extreme party Galloway was the recognized head. 
During the later period of colonial history he was almost 
invariably elected speaker of the house and against him the 
bitterest attacks of the opposition were directed. Unques- 
tionably an able leader, possessed of that faculty of organiza- 
tion which accomplished so much in American colonial history, 
it would be unfair to assert that motives of personal advantage 
were the cause of Galloway's activity at this time, and yet no 
one would have gained more by the change to Crown govern- 
ment than he. It may, however, be fairly urged that Galloway 
was a firm believer in the necessity of colonial union and 
that, in a common subordination of all the colonies to the 



102 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

Crown, he saw the first step toward the realization of that 
project. 

Second to Galloway in nominal leadership but superior to him 
in ability was Franklin. Concerning his motives, much the 
same arguments may be advanced, and were advanced, as in 
the case of his fellow. As Galloway was accused of desiring 
a change only that he might be prime minister of the colony, 
so Franklin was accused of desiring the position of Crown 
agent. ^ On the other hand, as Galloway claimed that the 
Assembly should be the real as it was the natural representa- 
tive of colonial interests, so Franklin wrote to Strahan : " Our 
petty public affairs here are in the greatest confusion and will 
never, in my opinion, be composed while the proprietaiy gov- 
ernment subsists."- One argument was urged by the Crown 
party which all must recognize as vahd. No proprietor hav- 
ing large holdings of land within the province could be ex- 
pected to advance the general interests of the colony at the 
expense of his particular interests as a landholder. The proof 
of this argument was found in the careful guarding by the 
governor of the proprietary lands from equitable taxation. 

Opposed to the Crown party were two groups favoring the 
continuance of the existing order. The larger group w^as in the 
west. Disregarding the relative merits of Crown and pro- 
prietor, the w^esterners knew that from the legislative ring 
they had received unfair treatment in the past, and without 
particular love for the Penn family, they w^ere solidly opposed 
to any extension of oligarchical rule. Theoretical as distinct 
from practical argument was furnished by Dickinson and the 
eastern wing of the proprietary party. This portion of the 
opposition was composed of certain Philadelphians who felt 
that the interests of neither city nor colony would be advanced 
through an extension of the power already possessed by a 

» Penn Letter Book, Vol. VIII ; Letters of Thomas Penn, June 8 and 13, 1764. 
2Works, Bigelow Edition, III, 248. 



The Opc7iing of the Conflict. 103 

minority. Their argument was in brief that, although pro- 
prietary government had not been perfect, Crown control 
would be worse. The Crown had better means of corrupting 
the Assembly than had the proprietor ; Crown government in 
other colonies had been worse than their own experience, and 
the Assembly when supported by the whole colony had thus 
far never failed to bring the proprietary to terms on any desired 
measure. The colony, in spite of several threatened appeals 
to the Crown (1742, 175 1, 1753, 1756), had never really 
desired to overthrow the existing method of government, and 
while the opposition would be willing to join in any logical 
settlement of such questions as those of provincial taxation 
by referring them to a board of arbitration, it was not willing 
to open the door for a much greater measure of external 
control than any of which the proprietors were capable.^ On 
whichever side we may consider the merit of argument to 
have rested, the Crown party had the votes, and Franklin was 
sent to England with a petition to the king praying him to 
assume the government of the province. Inasmuch as the 
international disputes already arising prevented action upon 
this petition until after the eastern oligarchy had lost its power, 
the controversy interests us only as it indicates the division of 
sentiment within the colony and as it affected the careers of 
the intellectual leaders of the state. Galloway's position during 
the struggle caused him to be disliked by the west even more 
than before, if that were possible ; Franklin was removed, by 
his mission, from the colonial disputes of the next decade, and 
his absence gave him on his return an additional influence with 
many in the colony, while to Dickinson was given the oppor- 
tunity of becoming the champion of popular rights.^ 

1 See the speeches of Dickinson and Galloway, Franklin's pamphlet, and the 
discussion in Shepherd's Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania. 

* No better proof of the prominence which religion had among the people of 
Pennsylvania, or of the bitterness existing between the Presbyterian and other 
religious bodies, could be desired than the forward position into which the church 



104 '^^^^ Revolutionary Movemettt in Pe7i7isylvania. 

While the Assembly was considering the question of Pro- 
prietary versus Crown government, the western portion of the 
colony was more interested in the determination of the rela- 
tions which should exist between the province and the Indians. 
The attitude of the east upon this question determined the 
position which the frontiersmen took in the proprietary 
struggle. In their opinion it was absolutely necessary that 
the colony be protected against Indian ravages, but in the 
differences which had arisen between them and their Indian 

leaders were pushed by this proprietary struggle. It was asserted that church 
ascendancy was the real object sought by ea<Si party in the dispute. On the one 
side it was urged that the real object of Presbyterian effort was independence and 
that they prostituted religion to political purposes. Thus, in A Looking-Glass 
for Presbyterians, or a brief examination of their Loyalty, Merit and other 
Qualifications for Government, etc. [Philadelphia, 1764], after speaking of the 
fine results Quaker rule had accomplished for Pennsylvania, the author continues, 
[page 4] : " But had their Seats been filled with Presbyterians, we should inevitably 
have been in a much worse condition for it is very evident, from undeniable 
Facts that they are by no means proper Men to hold the Reigns of Government, 
either in War or Peace. For if a finu Attachment to the King and the Laws of 
our Country be necessary Ingredients in a representative of the People, a Presby- 
terian can lay no claim to them, and consequently ought not to be elected. . . ." 
" In the Annals both of Ancient and Modern history Presbyterianism and Rebel- 
lion were Twin Sisters, sprung from Faction and their Affection for each other 
has ever been so strong that a separation of them never could be effected. What 
King has ever reigned in Great Britain whose Government has not been disturbed 
with Presbyterian Rebellions since ever they were a People?" The author 
continues [page 9]: "I earnestly hope every other Denomination will take the 
Pains to examine them. . . . Whenever this righteous People have the 
power in their Hands, they will tolerate no other Profession or Opinion but their 
own, and never cease until they establish themselves in such a manner so as to 
exclude all other Sects. For the Proof of this witness Scotland and New Eng- 
land." [Page 15]: "I would seriously ask . . . what cou'd a Sett of Men 
do more in the Assembly for protecting this Province than the People called 
Quakers have done ? It can be undeniably proved that more Money has been 
raised in this Province for carrying on the war, than any other in America. It 
can also be proved that the Necessity of raising money was never disputed but 
the Manner of Taxation." See also A Letter from a Gentleman in Transyl- 
vania to Ilis Friend in America, and The Quaker Vindicated. It is generally 
admitted, however, that the Quakers as a society would neither fight nor openly 
subscribe in behalf of a war. 



The Opening of the Conflict. 105 

neighbors the Assembly had almost invariably sided with 
the Indians and had offered no protection to the frontiers- 
men further than attempting to conciliate their assailants by 
presents. In 1730 the legislature had decided that new- 
settlers in the Conestogoe Manor must satisfy the Indian 
claim before their own land titles would be recognized as 
valid. In 1749 Parliament had excused the Germans, Mora- 
vians and Methodists from military service on the ground of 
conscientious scruples and the troops that were stationed in 
Pennsylvania were not available against the frontier destroyers. 
Franklin complained ^ that the government instead of " garri- 
soning the forts on the frontiers ... to prevent incur- 
sions " had " demolished those forts and ordered the troops 
into the heart of the country, that the savages may be encour- 
aged to attack the frontiers and that the troops may be 
protected by the inhabitants." Thus, unaided by Crown or 
Assembly, the Scotch-Irish bore the whole burden of the 
Indian troubles, and it was peculiarly aggravating for them 
to be told by the unmolested settlers along the Delaware that 
their own aggressions and their own quarrelsome dispositions 
were the real source of the border troubles. No wonder, they 
replied, that the eastern counties were able to get along 
amicably with the Indians and wished to maintain cordial 
relations with them, for these counties were protected by a 
line of frontier settlements, and while the merchants of Phila- 
delphia made money from the Indian trade they suffered 
nothing from Indian marauding. Let them come out and 
settle beside that race which they pretended to love and their 
opinions would change. In truth there was the same differ- 
ence between the two sections of the colony regarding the 
Indians that is found to-day between the west and the east 
and which is explained by commercial and sentimental con- 
siderations. 

^ Rules for reducing a great empire to a small one, \ 19. 



1 06 The Revolutionary Mo7>emc7it in Pennsylvania. 

The party in favor of the Indians was found in Philadelphia, 
New York and in England. That party, in such pamphlets as 
Serious Considerations on the Present State of the Affairs 
of the Northern Colonies in North America, claimed that 
the treatment which the Indians received at the hands of the 
frontiersmen was a disgrace to the English race and made 
very clear the low type of civilization peculiar to the people 
living in the Susquehanna valley. To such writers as these 
the Presbyterians attributed the lukewarmness of the support 
which they received from the government troops, although it 
was more probably due to the desire of England to obtain 
Indian allies against the French.^ Whether or not the Indians 
had been degraded by contact with the whites, it is certain 
that in 1750 the Pennsylvanians of the frontier had some 
excuse for declining to treat them as friends. Even the mis- 
sionaries describe them as of an "indolent, wandering, unsteady 
disposition, with a great and almost universal propensity to 
liquor." ^ Not only did the Quakers refuse to act in behalf 
of their fellow colonists but they refused to allow the gov- 
ernor to give aid to the westerners, or, indeed, to allow the 
frontiersmen to defend themselves. In 1757^ the Assem- 
bly had declared that as the House of Commons had the 
right to name " certain commissions " the colonial legis- 
lature had the "settled right" of selecting the commissions 
to the Indian tribes and they forced the governor to agree 
to their contention, the latter merely maintaining that the 

1 See The State of the British and French Colonies in North America. 
London, 1755. 

2 See the Letter from Mr. John Brainard, employed by the Scotch Society for 
Propagating the Gospel, London, 1753, which can be advantageously compared 
with Wieser's descriptions on which the Quaker ideas were based. See also 
Doddridge, Notes, chapters 24 and 25. "I have seen several of the Moravian 
Indians and their conduct soon convinced me that the conversion of those whom 
I saw was far from being complete." — [Doddridge, chap. 24.] See also the 
articles in Sauer's Berichte. 

' Votes, IV, 747 and 750. 



The OpC7iing of the Conflict. 107 

Assembly should choose outsiders as members of the com- 
mission. The Assembly also claimed and enforced the 
right of regulating military operations and supplies and even 
the appointment of officers.' 

Having thus obtained the power of control it was to be 
expected that the dominant faction in the Assembly would 
be held responsible for its exercise, and the fact that their 
previous line of belief and action laid the Quakers open to sus- 
picion did not make their position any easier. The Americans 
had comparatively little interest in the European aspect 
of the Seven Years' War, but the attacks of the Indians 
upon the frontiers appealed directly to their immediate 
welfare, and it was felt by that part of the province most 
directly menaced that a people like the Quakers were not the 
ones to lead in the emergency. " What man of prudence 
would venture to tell an English fox hunter that there are 
some among us who hunt fish on horseback?" wrote Dulaney 
to Carrol. •' But yet perhaps this would be as easily believed, 
that one set of people could be so infatuated as to declare 
against the right of self-defence when barbarians the most 
cruel and merciless were in the heart of the country." ^ This 
sentiment was not confined to the press, for in 1757 Samuel 
Finley, in a sermon entitled The Curse of Meroz or the 
Danger of Neutrality, declared: "They who belong to a 
community and yet will not assist in defending it when attacked 
are to be esteemed as virtual enemies, for they deliver us into 
our enemies' hands as far as their deserting us can do it." 
As the first movements of the war proved unsuccessful and as 
the entreaty of the Quakers to General Braddock to make 
peace by giving up a neutral zone to the Indians became 
known, the anger against Quaker leadership became more 
pronounced. A letter from Reading said : " The people 

1 Votes, IV, 717. 

« Pa. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., Ill, 12. 



io8 TJie Revolutionary Movement m Pcnnsylvmiia. 

exclaim against the Quakers, and some are scarce restrained 
from burning- the houses of those few who are in this town." ^ 
.Vs the war continued this sentiment of anger changed to 
one of suspicion that the dominant party in the Assembly was 
not acting honestly by the colony. By 1 764 it was openly 
charged that the real object of the commercial ring in control 
of colonial politics had been to remain on good terms with 
the Indians that trade relations might not be disturbed. When 
the Assembly petitioned the king for a change of government 
a circular letter was written by Tenant, Allison and Ewing, 
Presbyterian clergymen of Philadelphia, by order of the 
synod, to the church throughout the province, against the 
petition. They charged the Quakers with having secretly 
supported the Indians by holding treaties and maintaining cor- 
respondence with them during the war, and with having given 
them arms and ammunition even while they were murdering 
the frontier peoples.' By Presbyterian writers, such as those 
who contributed to the Plain Dealer, it was urged that 
self-interest had been the one object of Quaker control in the 
province,^ and the counter charges were no less abusive. 

' Col. Records, VI, 705. 

^Gordon, Hist, of Pa., p. 422. 

3 See the Plain Dealer, Nos. I, 2 and 3. The first number accuses the 
eastern conservatives of seeking to prevent western growth and prosperity, lest 
that section become too powerful; the second is an attack on Franklin's Cool 
Thoughts; and the third shows in detail tlie attempt of the Assembly to culti- 
vate the favor of the Indians for the east as well as to excite them against the 
proprietary and the frontiers. The first and third numbers, signed " W. D.," 
were probably written by Williamson, the second is merely signed "X. Y. Z." 

The violent writing was by no means confined to the Presbyterian side. Replies 
to the Plain Dealer were fully as scurrilous as was that pamphlet itself. Here 
is a sample from The Author of the Quaker Unmasked Strip'd Stark Naked 
or the Delineated Presbyterian play'd Hob With: 

"I am extremely sorry you have Involved yourself in such a deluge of 
Untruths, from which you'll find the utmost difiiculty to extricate yourself, I 
mean from the deserved Censures and Contempt of every honest Man (the 
Quakers in particular) whom your piece is pointed at ! 'Tis impossible you can 
recover your usual Credit but by a sincere and Publick Acknowledgment that you 



TJic Opcjiing of tJtc Conflict. 109 

The close of the war brought this difference of sentiment 
between the two parties, as to the attitude to be maintained 
against the Indians, to a crisis. The announcement of the Enghsh 
pohcy of a neutral zone made it evident that white settlements 
could no longer engulf the Indians or drive them beyond the 
Ohio. A limit had been fixed and the Indian question was at 
once hurried to a decision. Control of the provincial policy 
by force, or by securing an increased representation in the 
Assembly, were the alternatives presented to the westerners 
and each was tried in turn. 

Whatever may have been the result of the war upon the 
relations between Pennsylvania and the Mother Country, it 
had weakened the colonial governor within the province and 
had also weakened the Assembly in the estimation of those 
who had become angry because of the lack of energy which 
it had shown. The result was an open defiance of its author- 
ity. The circumstances relating to the so-called Indian mas- 
sacre at Conestogoe are easily told, but the excitement aroused 
by the action lasted well into the next decade and caused an 
enormous amount of argument, which filled the press of the 
time. The importance of the trouble lay not merely in the 
fact that a party of frontiersmen had attacked a few Indians 
who were living under the protection of the government, but 
that it was significant of an impatience of control throughout 
the west and within the city of Philadelphia. The frontiers- 
men had been exasperated by the action of the Assembly 
during the war and by their inability to obtain equal represen- 
tation in the legislature. The city, in turn, was but little less 
excited by the assumptions of superiority on the part of the 

were Prompted thereto by Envy, Hatred and Malice, and that the Father of 
Lyes was your Dictator." "The title of your book (' Plain Truth ') is a deep 
deception. I have examined it and find no less than 17 positive Lyes and 10 
false Insinuations. . . . You wrote it with a truly Pious Lying Presby- 
terian Spirit." " P. S. — I have but faintly pointed at and slightly touched at the 
character of a Presbyterian. — Timothy Wigwag." 



1 1 The Revolutionary Aloveiticnt in Pennsylvania. 

ruling faction in the Assembly and the taunts to which they 
were subject. " These people cannot bear Indulgence," wrote 
one of the majority party in February, 1774,^ " owing to the 
Effect their Principles have, for they are, and have always 
been, though under the mildest of Governments, a Sett of 
uneasy, discontented and innov^ating people." This writer 
taunted the opposition with the fact that although there were 
more Presbyterians than Quakers in the province, " for, 
unhappy for it, it swarms with them," yet the Assembly still 
continued to have a Quaker majority,^ for "their Constituents 
seeing the happy effect of their upright Conduct in every 
public Trust, executive as well as legislative, have always 
endeavored still to keep them possessed of it." To persons 
who knew that one great reason, if not the greatest, why these 
men maintained a majority in the Assembly was injustice in 
representation, such words were not soothing. Nor was it 
pleasant for men in the city who were in favor of more just 
conduct toward the west, men like Ewing and Allison, to be 
told that " The lower sort of People are very imitative of their 
Superiors, — They watch their Motions, Looks and Eyes, — If 
therefore the more sensible Part of you would openly disavow 
your Disapprobation (sic) of these Measures you will find this 
Rage and Clamour will soon subside. These People will dis- 
perse, they will crumble like the Dust and disappear like the 
Snow that melted yesterday." ^ This would have been well 

^ Remarks on the Quaker Unmasked. 

2 One quotation may be given to show that in this question, as in that of the 
proprietary, religion was forced to play a part. It occurs in An Answer to the 
Pamphlet entitled the Conduct of the Paxton Men, page 3. " Did they (the 
attackers) propose to have thrown off the Reins of government entirely and paid 
no Tribute but to their Goddess Presbytery." Page 10, "Was it not Presby- 
terians that murdered the Indians at Lancaster ? Was it not Presbyterians who 
came down with an intent to murder the Indians in the Barraks? Was not the 
Author of the Quaker Unmasked one of their esteemed ministers ? ... In 
fine, I think the Presbyterians have been the Authors and Abettors of all the mis- 
chief that's happened to us as a People." 

•A Serious Address, etc. 



TJic Opermtg of the Cofiflict. Ill 

had the frontiersmen had no grievance, or had all their friends 
in the city been ruffians, but such was not the case. Even if 
the question of representation had not been made a part of the 
dispute it would have been impossible for men continually 
exposed to Indian attack, or who had seen their fellow Chris- 
tians neglected that presents might be given to these Indians, 
to side with the Assembly. In their opinion the Indians 
should have been driven away in the beginning and none of 
these later troubles would have arisen. They therefore pre- 
pared to carry out their judgment on the principle that deferred 
justice was better than none. 

The settlement of Conestogoe Manor was under the pro- 
tection of the province and was composed of Indians who had 
been partially Christianized. They were assumed to be the 
descendants of the men with whom Penn had made his first 
treaties and for this reason entitled to the land upon«which they 
were settled. It has been claimed that they had given no 
cause of offence and that the attack upon them in 1 763 was 
entirely unjustified, yet it seems that during the French war, 
in spite of their treaties with the colony, presents had -been 
necessary to retain their allegiance.^ During the administra- 
tion of Governor Hamilton, the government had been re- 
quested to remove these people from their lands and reasons 
had been given for such removal. Later, commissioners 
appointed by the Assembly had looked into the matter and 
reported that the Indians were dangerous under existing con- 
ditions, for they were in alliance with tribes hostile to the 
colony, and it had also been shown that some of them were in 
arms against Colonel Bouquet. Finally, thinking the govern- 
ment would not act, having been assured indeed by Governor 
Penn that the colony would protect the Indians, the frontiers- 
men took matters into their own hands, marched against the 
Conestogoe Manor, killed such of the Indians as were there, 

1 Colonial Records, VIII, 113, 122, 135. Ewing to Reed, Life of Reed, I, 34. 
A Declaration and Remonstrance. 



112 The Rcvohitionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

murdered those who had been placed in the Lancaster alms- 
house for safe keeping, and finally proceeded against those who 
had been conducted, under Quaker guardianship, to the Phila- 
delphia barracks. This action threatened to result seriously, 
for a rival force composed of those in the cit>' and county who 
desired to maintain order and to defend the Indians was formed 
(many Quakers seem to have been among them) and threats 
were made that the royal troops would be called upon for aid. 
In this emergency many of the so-called lower elements 
appear to have been willing to join the " Paxton Boys,"^ but 
Franklin acted as mediator and actual conflict was prevented. 
He went to Germantown, met the invaders, and persuaded 
them to be satisfied with drawing up a petition for redress of 
grievances and more equitable representation. 

On December 29, 1763, the governor had sent a message and 
proclamation to the Assembly deprecating the attack at Cones- 
togoe and notifying the legislature of the removal of the 
remainder of the tribe to Philadelphia. At the same time he 
asked a vote of money to defend them in their new refuge and 
the reception given this request shows the intensity of the pas- 
sions which had been aroused. Foulke says : " The House 
immediately passed a vote of credit to repay any Expense which 
might accrue upon or in respect of ye circumstances : but so 
great was the prejudice which possessed ye minds of a great many 
of ye Frontier Inhabitants against the s'd Indians and ye main- 
taining them at ye publick Expense, and the disaffection appear- 
ing to spread like a Contagion into ye Interior parts of ye 
province (by which he means the three Quaker counties) and 
even ye City itself, that ye Government became in some 
measure intimidated by the reported threats of ye back inhabi- 
tants, and thinking it safer to remove ye Indians Entirely out 
of ye province did hurry 'em away to New York."^ New York 
did not care to become concerned in the trouble, so the 

^Scharf V. Westcott, I, 241. 

^Foulke's Diary, in Pa. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., V, 60. 



The Opening of the Conjiict. 113 

Indians were soon on their way back to Philadelphia. On 
February 7, when the mob was on the point of entering the 
city, the governor sent an embassy out to meet it and if pos- 
sible to turn it back. "They frankly confessed," continues 
Foulke, " they had set out with full purpose to kill every 
Indian in the barracks, having been invited and e^icouraged by 
many considerable persons in Philadelphia and [having been 
told] that they should meet with no opposition in the execu- 
tion of their design." When they found that the Indians 
were protected by the king's troops they desisted because of 
loyalty, "a very poor, thin guise this, to cover the disloyal 
principles of the faction which appears to be a Presbyterian 
one — that society throughout the province being tainted with 
the same bloody principles with respect to the Indians and 
of disaffection to the Government." From this account it is 
evident that the disaffection against the government was by no 
means confined to the west. 

The rioters Avere at length persuaded to disperse and then 
the Assembly began the preparation of a measure to punish 
the so-called murderers, but the current was too strong in 
favor of the incipient revolt and this purpose had to be aban- 
doned. The governor indeed placed himself on the popular 
side, and in July, 1764,^ issued a proclamation tending to 
assuage the discontent at the colonial Indian policy. The 
document offered a reward of one hundred and fifty Spanish 
dollars for every male Indian over ten years of age captured 
and brought to Philadelphia, one hundred and thirty for every 
female, one hundred and thirty-four for every male scalp, and 
fifty for every female scalp. Such was the result of the first 
effort to overawe the eastern Quaker conservatism. Although 
the colonial discontents were for the moment suppressed, the 
movement served to teach the dissatisfied elements that if 
united they could secure their ends. 

1 Pennsylvania Gazette, July 12. 
8 



CHAPTER VII. 
The Introduction of International Questions. 



Authorities. 

The Annual Register. 

Pickering, Danby: The Statutes at Large from Magna Charta to 1761. 
Cambridge, 1 762. [Continued 1762-1869.] 

Burke, Edmund: Speeches on Conciliation with America. 

Gordon, William: The History of the American Revolution. 

Frothingham, Richard: The Rise of the Republic. 

Sheffield, John Baker Holroyd, Earl of: Observations on the Commerce of 
the American States. 

The above list of authorities is small compared with the number which might 
be given as the international conflict began to influence local politics. The whole 
literature of the Revolution might be mentioned, but the pamphlets circulating at 
Philadelphia and the Philadelphia newspapers have been the author's real reliance, 
and those have been already mentioned. Other works have been used to obtain 
the text of laws and the drift of English opinion rather than as illustrating the 
movement in Pennsylvania. 

We have traced the origin of the revolution in Pennsylvania ; 
we may now consider the circumstances which hastened its 
culmination. 

The real cause of the differences which were continually 
arising between England and the colonies was the divergent 
conceptions of the British constitution entertained by the two 
peoples, and the difference in their economic needs. Racial 
and religious distinctions had united with dissimilar conditions 
in creating two nations, each professing to base its political 
faith on the same historical precedents, yet drawing conclu- 
sions which were irreconcilable. To the American steeped in 
the ideas of contract and covenant the agreements which had 
been entered into between king and people were important 
only as they gave expression to conditions which had existed 
before. The rights which an individual had as a man and as 

(114) 



\ 

\ 
\ 

\ 
TJie Intyodiiction of International Questions. 115 

a Christian were deeper in their nature than any privilege of a 
parhamentary body whose only reason for existence was the 
exercise of delegated duties. The king and parliament should 
have guaranteed to the individual the peaceable enjoyment of 
his just claims, and it was precisely because they had not done \ 
so that the Puritan and Quaker had come to America to \ 
re-establish the English government in its original purity. \ 
West of the Atlantic the Americans had succeeded in gaining \ 
from the Crown a recognition of rights unacknowledged in \ 

England Their brethren in Britain had seen the colonial 
position theoretically justified in 1688, and despite the opposi- 
tion of misguided Englishmen, they would see that position, 
in case of necessity, again upheld in America/ 

Because the great statutes of British history were regarded 
as a recognition of popular privilege, they were reverenced in 
America even more than in England herself, but it is signifi- 
cant of American feeling that the colonial legislatures early in 
their history confirmed these statutes by acts of their own. 
Rhode Island's re-enaction of the great charter in 1663 was 
but one instance of this feeling of legislative separation, and a 
more striking illustration is found in the Bill of Rights set 
forth by New York in 1689, differing, as it did, from that 

1 It was in no narrow sense that the colonists used the terms English and Eng- 
lishmen, but with a meaning which made them coextensive with the lands over 
which the king reigned. Thus, in the address to the Crown framed by the Stamp 
Act congress, in defending " the invaluable Rights of taxing ourselves and Trials 
by our Peers," that body declared: "On the first of these Rights the Honorable 
House of Commons found their Practice of originating Money Bills, a Right 
enjoyed by the Kingdom of Ireland, by the Clergy of England, until relinquished 
by themselves; a Right, in fine, -which all other your Majesty s English Subjects, 
loth within and ■withottt the Realvi, have hitherto enjoyed.'''' That is, a man was 
no less entitled to all English rights from the fact that he resided in America or 
Ireland; although he might have in addition gained the recognition of other 
privileges which his fellow at home had not retained. He had been a member 
of the body that joined together and created the British state, and whether he 
had remained in England or had come to America was immaterial, so long as he 
had not entered another allegiance. 



1 1 6 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

passed by Parliament. Penn caused the more important con- 
stitutional documents to be circulated in Pennsylvania that the 
people might know their rights, and successive generations 
did not hesitate to add such new items to their legal claims 
as would round out their constitutional structure. To the 
American mind the English constitution was interpreted by 
Locke, Montesquieu and Blackstone, much more completely 
than by any series of parliamentary enactments. Magna 
Charta and the Bill of Rights were important, not because 
they created any privilege, but because they reasserted immu- 
nities which Englishmen seemed in danger of losing.^ Such 
had been the view of many of the original immigrants to 
America, and this view became more pronounced with each 
succeeding generation. After the death of the first settlers, 
Americans obtained their knowledge of English conditions 
from books and not from experience. The hostility preva- 
lent in America to the government of England during the 
seventeenth century was replaced in the eighteenth by a pride 
in English achievement on the Continent and an idealization 
of the English constitution. The predictions of a separation 
between the two divisions of the British Empire came from 

^ Thus one writer declared in A Letter to the People of Pennsylvania Occa- 
sioned by the Assembly's passing that Important Act for Constituting the Judges 
of the Supream Courts and Common Pleas During Good Behavior [p. 25, 
Philadelphia, Dunlap, 1760]. "It is worthy your Infonnation, yfrj/. That the 
Rights and Liberties claimed and declared by the Bill of Rights, that second 
Magna Charta, and the Act of Settlement, created no innovation of the Antient 
Constitution. The Parliament had no Design to Change but only to restore the 
antient Laws and Customs of the Realm which were the True and Indubitable 
Rights and Liberties of the People of England. . . . These rights are 
inseparably Inherent in the Persons of every freebom Englishman. 
Those excellent laws were intended to extend, and do extend, to all the King's 
subjects in America." Page 35 : " Are you not of the same stock as Englishmen ? 
Was the blood of your ancestors polluted by a change of soil ? Were they 
freemen in England and did they become slaves by a six weeks' voyage to 
America? Is not our Honor and Virtue as pure, our liberty as valuable, our 
property as dear, our lives as precious here as in England? " 



TJie Introduction of International Questions. Wj 

Europe, and not from America, during the first half of the 
eighteenth century. Not until the real constitution was dis- 
tinguished from the colonial ideal did American dissatisfaction 
become prominent. * 

Americans believed in natural inherent rights, and they 
believed that the English constitution alone among existing 
frames of government preserved them to the people. As 
they became acquainted with conditions in England they saw 
that these rights were not being enjoyed by Englishmen, and 
they concluded that their brothers had allowed the exercise of 
original powers to slip from them, and thus had substituted a 
legal for a constitutional government. The colonial leaders 
were determined that this substitution should not be made in 
their own case, and eagerly read the arguments in support of 
the constitutional position. Thus Granville Sharpe ^ admitted 
that difficult questions of jurisprudence demanded a critical 
knowledge of law, but asserted that broad questions of 
human rights required no especial familiarity with statutes. 
Following this argument in behalf of every man's right to 
pass on constitutional principles, he said : " As all British 
subjects, whether in Great Britain, Ireland or the colonies, are 
equally free by the Lazv of Nature, they certainly are equally 
entitled to the same natural rights, . . . and this privilege 
of having a share in legislation is not merely a British right 
peculiar to this island, but a Natural Right," an argument 
which he based upon the authority of Hooker, and which was 
very agreeable to the Irish, Scotch and German patriots in 

^ There had been many European prophecies that the colonies would not long 
continue subject to England. Among others may be mentioned that of Choiseul 
in 1763: "They stand no longer in need of her protection. She will call upon 
them to contribute toward the burdens which they have helped to bring upon her, 
and they will answer by throwing off all dependence." The predictions of Kalm 
and Turgot are well known, and as early as 1730 Montesquieu had observed that 
England would be the first nation abandoned by her colonies, a prediction repeated 
by Montcalm in 1757. 

'A Declaration of the People's Natural Right, etc. 



1/ 



1 1 8 Tlic Revolutionary Movoncnt in Pennsylvania. 

Pennsylvania. He then continued : ^ "It must be acknowl- 
edged that the Representation of the People of England is 
not so perfect as equit>" may seem to require, since very many 
individuals have no vote in elections, . . . yet notwith- 
standing the inequality of the English representation and the 
various means practiced to corrupt it, yet it has been the 
principal instrument of preserving amongst us those remains 
of natural Liberty which we still enjoy in a greater proportion 
than most other kingdoms." " The inequality of Represen- 
tation in this island affords no just argument for setting aside 
the Representation of the People in other parts of the British 
Empire, because experience teaches us that even a defective 
representation is better than none at all." ^ " In every point 
of view the making laws for the subjects of any part of the 
British Empire, without their participation and assent is 
iniquitous, and therefore unlawful. . . . To give up 
the ancient and established right of the people to be repre- 
sented in the legislature would be to subvert the principles 
and constitution on which the very existence of the legislature 
itself is formed." ^ He did not look with favor upon Ameri- 
can representatives at London, but declared that ^ "the 
true constitutional mode of connecting British dominions that 
are otherwise separated by nature is demonstrated b}' the 
example of the union of Great Britain and Ireland. '"^ 

There was a need of something beside a knowledge of 

1 Page 5. 

' Page 7. 

3 Page 9. 

*Page 14. 

* This pamphlet, based on the arguments of Aristotle, Lord Sommers, Hooker 
and Fortesque, appeared in Philadelphia, July 25, 1774, while the provincial 
convention and the legislature were considering the sending of representatives to 
the first Congress. It had previously been printed in London, and seems to have 
been popular among the radical party during 1774 and 1775. See also Con- 
siderations in Respect to the Measures carrying on with Respect to the British 
Colonies. Phila., B. Towne, 1774. 



The Introduction of Intcrnatmial Questions. 1 1 9 

English law to establish the American position. When Dick- 
inson wrote in the Farmers' Letters, " We are as much 
dependent upon Great Britain as one perfectly free people can 
be on another," it needed more than a legal mind to explain 
the situation. Much more satisfactory in its exactness was 
the position of Franklin or of John Adams. " The more I 
have thought and read on the subject," said the former, "the 
more I find myself confirmed in the opinion that no middle 
doctrine can be well maintained. . . , Something might 
be said for either of the extremes, that Parliament has a 
power to make all laws for us, or that it has a power to make 
no laws for us." ^ The latter stood squarely for colonial 
independence. " Our provincial legislatures are the only 
supreme authority in our colonies. . . . Parliament may 
be allowed an authority supreme and sovereign over the 
ocean, which may be limited by the banks of the ocean or 
the bounds of our charters." Americans went beyond the 
law and found the principle on which the law was based, and 
their arguments were copied, not from statutes, but from 
treatises on the principles of government. 

One hint concerning the constitutional ideas prevalent in 
Pennsylvania during the years preceding the revolution is 
found in the books offered for sale by the booksellers or 
found in the libraries of Philadelphia. It was from these that 
the people obtained their ideas of the English constitution so 
far as it was distinct from the government in operation before 
their eyes, and these writings were repeatedly quoted in the 
pamphlet literature of the sixties and seventies. First among 
the authors must be placed Locke, in the words of one pam- 
phleteer, " the finest reasoner and best writer on government 
that this or any other age has produced." ^ Again and again 
in the advertisements of David Hall, of William Sellers, or 

1 March lo, 1768. 

2 Pennsylvania Gazette, SeptemVjer 29, 176S. 



I20 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

of Rivington and Brown, his treatises on Toleration, on the 
Human Understanding, and on Government, were mentioned, 
and his complete works were frequently offered for sale. In 
the library advertisements his name was usually found, and it 
is not surprising that his influence was so marked. Other 
writers frequently mentioned were Milton, Sydney, Blackstone, 
Hooker, "that learned and judicious Divine," Montesquieu, 
and Rousseau. 

History was a favorite study among Pennsylvanians, if we 
may rely upon the records of books advertised. Hume's 
History of England and Robertson's Scotland were often 
mentioned, and copies of the Annual Register kept people 
informed on current events. Philosophers like Helvetius, 
Hobbes and Voltaire found places beside Hawkins and 
Hale. It is not strange that Burke considered Americans all 
lawyers, or that the papers written by Pennsylvania statesmen 
during this period should rank in clearness and force with any 
of the time.^ Many Americans were educated at the Inns of 

1 A few of the books owned by the Library Company of Philadelphia in 1757 
are here given. The titles are taken from the Charter Laws and Catalogue of 
that company: 

Puffendorff 's Law of Nature and Nations. 

The Works of Nicholas Machiavel. 

A Complete Collection of the Historical, Political and Miscellaneous Works of 
J. Milton. 2 vols., Lond., 1738. 

The Works of John Locke, Esq., in 3 vols., 4th ed., Lond., 1740. 

The Works of that learned and judicious Divine, Mr. Richard Hooker, in VHI 
Books, of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity. Lond., 1723. 

The Brittanick Constitution : or, The Fundamental Form of Government in 
Britain; demonstrating the Original Contract entered into by King and People. 
Therein is proved That the placing on the Throne of King William HI was the 
Natural Fruit and Effect of the Original Constitution, etc., by Roger Acherly, 
Esq., Lend., 1727. 

Sidney's Discourses on Government. 

Several volumes on English law, among others Coke's Institutions and Hale's 
Pleas of the Crown. 

The Works of Francis, Lord Bacon. 4 vols., Lond., 1740. 

British Liberties or, The Free born Subject's Inheritance; Containing Magna 



The Introductio7t of International Questions. 1 2 1 

Court in England, Stille placing the number at one hundred and 
fifteen between 1760 and the close of the revolution/ These 
came chiefly from the south, where as yet there were few 
good schools and small literary advantages, forty-seven 
coming from South Carolina alone. As we go north the 
numbers decrease, Virginia furnishing twenty-one, Pennsyl- 
vania eleven and New England two. As a result of this 
legal training England had little advantage over America in 
book knowledge of Anglo-Saxon law, and in some cases 
{e. g., the law of libel) the elder country adopted the exposi- 
tion of her law which was advanced by colonial lawyers. 

Burke recognized that in America, much more than in 
England, the middle classes were educated in the general 
principles underlying all liberty. " In no country perhaps in 
the world," he declared in his speech on conciliation, "is the 
law so general a study. . . . All who read, 'and most do 
read, endeavor to obtain some smattering in that science. I 
have been told by an eminent bookseller that in no branch of 
his business, after tracts of popular devotion, were so many 
books as those on the law exported to the Plantations. . . . 
I hear they have sold nearly as many of Blackstone's Com- 
mentaries in America as in England." It was this familiarity 

Charta and all the important English statutes (a list of them is given). Lond., 

1719. 

Two Treatises of Government. By J. Locke, Esq. 1698. (There were sev- 
eral copies of Locke's works in the library. ) 

The Spirit of the Laws. Translated from the French of M. De Secondat, 
Baron of Montesquieu, 2d ed., 2 vols., Lond., 1752. 

The Principles of Natural Law. By J. J. Burlamaqui. Translated by Mr. 
Nugent. Lond., 1748. 

The Principles of Politic Law. By J. J. Burlamaqui. Lond., 1752. 

Several volumes of Voltaire's works and several histories of New England. 

The Woman as Good as the Man, or the Equality of Both Sexes. 

Utopia. Written in Latin by Sir Thomas More. Translated into English. 
Lond., 1684. 

An Inquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. By David Hume. 

1 Dickinson, p. 26. 



122 TJic Revolutionary Movemcjit in Pe?insylvania. 

with the principles of justice which made effective the demand 
for liberty in America. In national or in colonial politics cer- 
tain sects or leaders might say thus far and no farther, but 
the middle classes, the men of affairs, knew the rights which 
English jurisprudence and the principles expounded by Locke 
and Montesquieu guaranteed them. When therefore theorists 
like Dickinson endeavored to postpone the movement which 
aimed to secure equal political rights for all, and which had 
been aroused by theorists, men of less mental ability, but of 
more resolution, placed themselves at its head and carried 
matters to a successful conclusion. 

Having thus a different conception of the constitution, the 
Americans needed only a difference of economic interest to 
precipitate a conflict with the mother country. This economic 
grievance was caused by an English trade policy adopted only 
after long hesitation and enforced only after a longer period 
of open violation. The early navigation laws were, of course, 
aimed at Holland and not at the colonies. Cromwell in 165 1 
had felt no hesitancy in granting free trade to Virginia in 
return for colonial submission to Puritan government, and so 
long as the English sovereigns felt the necessity of bolstering 
up their throne by support gained from without England a 
colonial rebellion was carefully guarded against. Under the 
Stuarts men familiar with colonial conditions were appointed 
governors, and by such acts as that allowing gold exports 
from England (1663) financial relations between Great Britain 
and her colonies were improved. When the house of Han- 
over came into power efforts were made to conciliate the 
native Englishman regardless of the feeling aroused through- 
out the empire. From their foundation two views of the rela- 
tion existing between the colonies and the mother country had 
been current at London. One considered them a part of 
Britain, the other considered them as subject districts. The 
more absolute the king, the more England and America were 



The Introduction of International Questions. 123 

regarded as equals. The mercantile system might have had 
the empire for its basis as well as England alone, and at the 
time of its inauguration both views found support. Pamphlets 
were printed against the act of 1733/ and only after amend- 
ment was its passage secured. After the English base had 
been adopted by the commercial classes the imperial idea 
weakened, so that when Pownall in 1764 suggested an impe- 
rial customs union, ^ his argument found comparatively little 
support.^ In 1733 trading interests demanded that America 

^ e. g.. The Importance of the British Plantations in America to the Kingdom. 

^ Administration of the Colonies. 

' Driven from the commercial argument the defence of America, so far as it was 
presented in England, was forced to rest on grounds of natural right or of the 
glory found in a large empire. Referring to Turgot' s prophecy, it was urged that 
the tree at least should not be shaken, but the fruit kept on it as long as was pos- 
sible. These are the later arguments and, with the religious reasonings, were 
also reprinted in America. Some went so far as to justify rebellion on religious 
grounds. Thus in An Address to Protestant Dissenters of all Denominations 
on the approaching Election of Members of Parliament with Respect to the State 
of Public Liberty in General and American Affairs in particular. Priestly 
declared that civil liberty was a natural right and that only on the basis of civil 
liberty can religious liberty be maintained. " Your brethren in America will 
probably be compelled to take up Arms in defense of their liberties, for Parlia- 
ment, although it has no right to legislate out of England, seems resolved to do 
so. . . . Wlien the Puritans quitted the realm of England they freed them- 
selves from the laws of England. Indeed they could have had no other motive 
for leaving this country: and how could they have expected any relief from taking 
refuge in America if they had found in that country or carried with them the 
same laws or the same administration by which they were aggrieved in this. But 
going into a country which was out of the rcahn of England and not occupied 
they found themselves at first without any laws whatsoever. But they enacted 
laws for themselves voluntarily choosing ... to have the same king. They 
adopted as many of the laws of England as they chose but no more, and could 
have taken those of other countries." [Page 17.] " According to the language 
that was universally in use till of late years, to say that America was subject to 
England would have been considered as equally absurd with saying that it was 
subject to Ireland or Hanover." 

This argument was reprinted by Humphreys in Philadelphia in 1774, and was 
seized upon by the men of the time who were arguing against the danger of 
episcopacy as well as those who favored the doctrine of natural right. 



124 The Rcvolutio7iary Movement in Pemisylvatiia. 

should be treated as an outside country and forty-three years 
later their wish was granted. 

The Act of 1733 provided that all rum and spirits made 
outside of British jurisdiction should pay a duty of nine pence 
a gallon on importation into the colonies ; that molasses and 
syrup should be subject to a duty of six pence a gallon ; and 
that sugar should pay five shillings for each hundred pounds. 
It was upon this trade that Pennsylvania depended for her 
prosperity, for her grain went to the West Indies in return for 
the products enumerated by this act. The measure had no 
serious results, for it was not enforced, and the officials seem 
never to have regretted the non-enforcement. It is but little 
exaggeration to say that smuggling had the official sanction 
of the customs officials along the Delaware, and that the 
object of the law was rather to provide salaries for revenue 
officials in America than to obtain a monetary return for the 
English government. Those who wished to prevent trade 
between the colonies and the Indies were satisfied that the 
object had been accomplished when no return came in from 
the customs. Those who wished merely to obtain places for 
their supporters had no objection to a practice which made 
the offices more attractive. Whatever the object in view, the 
result was that smuggling became a virtue and a condition of 
affairs ensued which could be changed only by force. Burke 
indeed looked upon the American contraband trade as no 
great evil, ^ but Grenville not only intended that existing laws 
should be enforced, but that a permanent policy should be 
declared. On March 14, 1764,^ the so-called Sugar Act 
came before the Commons, and the restrictive trade policy 
was made perpetual.* The duty on sugar was increased, 

' See his speech on American Taxation, 1774. 
24 George III., c. 15. 

3 About two-thirds of the sugar imported into the colonies came, says Sheffield 
(p. 121), from other than British colonies, and the same writer estimates that 



The Introductio7i of International Questiofts. 125 

that on molasses lowered, and in general an attempt was made 
to so arrange the duties that more revenue should be secured. 
The preamble declared "that it is just and necessary that a 
revenue be raised ... in America . . . and the 
Commons of Great Britain . . . have resolved to give 
and grant . . . the several rates and duties hereinafter 
mentioned." In the following year an effort was made to 
enforce the laws, and this caused the rub. " This new inven- 
tion of collecting taxes makes them burdensome," wrote 
Knox in 1769,^ and Bernard in Massachusetts was of the 
same opinion.^ 

In Pennsylvania the initiative in opposing English policy 
was taken by the same elements that had opposed Crown gov- 
ernment in the proprietary struggle, but the colony was more 
nearly united than at any other period. Dickinson was no 
longer in the Assembly, but in "The Late Regulations 
Respecting the British Colonies on the Continent of America 
Considered," he did not hesitate to oppose the new laws. 
Then, as later, he furnished the argument upon which others 
might act, but at this time it was not the argument of a con- 
stitutional lawyer so much as that of the economist which he 
presented. He was appealing to English rather than American 
readers. The small revenue returns from the enforcement of 
such acts as the ones proposed were, in his opinion, of no 
importance compared with the trade benefits which English 
merchants received at the hands of the colonists. Indeed, 
the only object and result of the American trade with the 
Indies was to secure money which might be expended in 
England. The argument from the legal position of the 
colony under the charter and that which rested on the natural 

about one-third of the total imports of sugar and molasses was smuggled, finding 
one proof of this in the abnormal increase of customs with the substitution of a 
lower duty. 

1 The Controversy between England and her Colonies. 

* See also Graydon, Memoirs, p. 103. 



1 26 The Revolutionary Movewent in Pennsylvania. 

rights of Englishmen, were presented by other speakers and 
writers within and without the Assembly. No discussion was 
needed to show Americans their grievance, but a constitu- 
tional basis for resistance was desired, hence the writers and 
speakers who addressed Americans rather than Englishmen 
turned naturally to theoretical argument. 

The year which elapsed between the proposal of new duties 
and the enactment of the Stamp Act gave the Americans an 
opportunity to concentrate their resistance and reinforce their 
arguments. Intercommunication led to concerted action by 
the various colonies, and the recognition of an united senti- 
ment encouraged the party of resistance. As early as 1763/ 
the Philadelphia newspapers had printed reports from Charles- 
ton that the home government was soon to assume immediate 
direction of the colonies and would " oblige them to be 
unanimous in all points tending to their general good." The 
trade regulations were felt to be burdensome, and it was 
hoped that the king would propose some more equitable 
arrangement. "It is greatly to be wished that some system 
of trade might be discovered that would be equally the interest 
of all parts of the British Dominions to adhere to . . . 
Prohibitions upon trade show a defect in government and 
plainly call for amendment." No plan of active resistance 
was proposed, but it was urged that "if instead of acting 
contrary to the laws in being, every one would exert them- 
selves to have them amended and made just and equitable, 
w^e might probably in a little time obtain such a system of 
trading laws that no one would wish to violate them."^ 

This sentiment had partially changed by the time the 
Assembly met in the autumn of 1764. Trade regulations 
arid stamp acts were no longer regarded as unsuccessful 
efforts to prevent trade or secure uniformity, but as distinct 

> Gazette, July 21. 

* Pennsylvania Gazette, October 27, 1763. 



The Introduction of International Questions. 1 27 

evidences of a desire to raise a revenue, and to prevent colonial 
development. " England seems unwilling that America 
should advance," wrote Cox to Reed in April. "They seem 
somehow to be afraid we may grow too strong for them, I 
fancy, and apprehend our independency or, perhaps more truly, 
they seem to understand little of us, our interest or their own 
respecting us, and what will become of us I cannot tell if 
such be the present temper."^ Even yet, however, the 
important question in the mind of the dominant party in 
Pennsylvania was the control of the province, and not a 
change in imperial policy. Only as the agitation in other 
colonies was reported in the Philadelphia press and repre- 
sentations from them came to the Assembly was the magni- 
tude of the international question realized. Franklin did not 
leave for England until November, and in December he 
wrote Thompson that the petition of the colonies would not 
be granted, and advised saving in other ways in order to pay 
the taxes imposed by Parliament. Had the popular senti- 
ment in Pennsylvania been aroused Franklin never would 
have counselled such a policy of submission. 

On September 12, 1764, ' the speaker of the Pennsylvania 
Legislature laid before the Assembly the resolves of the 
Massachusetts House of Representatives relating to the sugar 
duties and the proposed stamp act, and the resolutions 
together with the letter accompanying them, were " ordered 
to lie on the Table for the Perusal and Consideration of the 
Members." On the 1 8th ^ consideration of the communica- 
tions was resumed and a committee was appointed to draw up 
instructions directing " Richard Jackson, Esq., Agent of this 
Province, to use his utmost Endeavours, in Conjunction with 
the Agents for the other Colonies, to obtain a Repeal of the 

1 Reed : Life of Reed, I, 31. 

2 Votes, V, 355. 

3 Votes, V, 359. 



128 The Revolutionary Movement in Pc7insylvania. 

late Sugar Act ; and that he also join with the said Agents in 
remonstrating against a Stamp Duty, with any other Taxes 
and Impositions intended to be laid by the Government of 
Great Britain on the Colonies in America repugnant to our 
Rights and Privileges as Freemen and as British Subjects." 
If a revenue was required the Legislature of Pennsylvania was 
the body to raise it. 

The session of the old Assembly had nearly expired when 
the notification of New England's action was received, and 
although this protest was made, the full results of outside 
influence were not seen until the newly-elected body met in 
the fall. By October messages from other colonies had followed 
that of Massachusetts and more vigorous action was expected. 
On October i8, 1764,^ a resolution was received from the 
committee of the General Assembly of Rhode Island in which 
attention was called to previous grievances at the hands of 
Great Britain, and the consequences of acquiescence in 
English demands pointed out. The Rhode Island committee 
asked " whether your colony hath taken these matters under 
consideration, and if it hath, what Methods have been thought 
of as most conducive to bring them to a happy issue ?" In 
default of any plan having been adopted a joint protest in 
defence of American rights, along the lines suggested by 
Massachusetts, was recommended. 

Taking this letter and the instructions of the previous 
Assembly under consideration, the house on October 18,^ 
appointed a committee of eight to suggest appropriate action. 
Under advice of this committee the Assembly, on October 20, 
instructed its representative at London to model his course on 
the lines suggested by the last house save that he was not to 
consent that taxes should be laid, even by a joint congress of 
all the colonies, upon the province of Pennsylvania but only 

1 Votes, V, 376. 

2 Votes V, 376. 



TJie Introductio7i of International Questions. 129 

by her own Assembly. He was further told that the hint in 
his former instructions that the colonies themselves might 
propose some other method of raising a revenue was wholly 
unfounded so far as Pennsylvania was concerned. Thus it 
was made clear that the Assembly would not agree to any 
system of parliamentary taxation and would take no action 
under compulsion. It would not bind the colony to raise any 
definite revenue, or to any future action. In short, it made a 
definite assertion of colonial independence from parliamentary 
or other outside control. Thus, to the disputes between east 
and west, to the differences between aristocracy and democracy 
was added the difficulty between Pennsylvania and Great 
Britain which was to bring the other contentions to a climax. 

The effect of the new dispute was at once apparent. While 
formerly the Assembly had assumed that Crown government 
in the colony would mean no change in the provincial charter 
and no decrease of its own importance, doubt was now felt 
and the agent in London was instructed that "if upon the 
most careful enquiry and mature Deliberation and Advice he 
should see cause to apprehend that in the change (to Crown 
Government) proposed there is danger of our People losing 
those inestimable Privileges, Civil and Religious, which by 
their Charter and Laws, they have a Right to enjoy under the 
present Constitution, he is in that Case positively directed and 
enjoined to suspend the presenting the said Petitions, till he 
has acquainted the Assembly with the Reasons, and received 
their further Direction." ^ 

On the next day the Assembly heard the report of the 
committee appointed to act in the matter of the sugar and 
stamp duties and gave their agent in England instructions to 
oppose those measures which " the Representatives of the 
Freemen of this Province do most humbly conceive, 
will, if carried into Execution have a Tendency to deprive the 

1 September 21, Votes, V, 361. 
9 



130 TJic Revolutionary Movement i?i Pennsylvania. 

good People of this Province of their most Essential Rights 
as British Subjects, and of the Rights granted to them by the 
royal charter of King Charles the Second and confirmed by 
Laws of this Province, which have received the Royal appro- 
bation." Then follows as clear a claim to legislative inde- 
pendence of the British Parliament as one can find in any sub- 
sequent document issued by America. " That by the Said 
Charter, among other Privi-leges, the right of Assessing their 
own Taxes, and of being free from any Impositions but those 
that are made by their own Representatives, is fully granted 
to the People of this Province : — And, besides, we apprehend 
that this is the indubitable Right of all the Colonists as Eng- 
lishmen." Later, reasons are brought forward to show that 
a consideration has been paid for the charter and that there- 
fore it is inviolable by any English body, but in the first decla- 
ration the colonists rest their claim not on chartei: alone but 
on the " indubitable Right of English Colonists." " The 
Said Charter and Laws are certainly of the same Validity, 
with respect to the Rights thereby granted to the People 
here, as the Laws and Statutes of England, with regard to 
the Privileges derived under them, to the People in England." 
Thus was the doctrine of two co-ordinate parts of one Empire 
maintained by the Pennsylvania Assembly in 1764. 

The Assembly did not rest its case entirely on constitu- 
tional arguments. Recognizing the importance of gaining 
the support of the merchants in England it proceeded to ■ 
show, as had Dickinson, that the cessation of foreign trade 
not only injured the colony but that it prevented the payment 
of debts contracted in England and the continued purchase 
of English goods. Imports from Great Britain had amounted 
to iJ"700,ooo annually, while exports had been less than half 
that amount (;^300,ooo). If, therefore, the means of obtain- 
ing gold from other portions of the world were taken away it 
would be impossible for colonial merchants to pay the trade 



The Introduction of International Questions. 131 

balance due Great Britain. Neither argument was effective, 
and united colonial action followed. 

On June 8, 1765, Massachusetts sent out her letter propos- 
ing a Stamp Act Congress in New York. It was presented 
to the Pennsylvania Assembly on September 10, and that 
body resolved to send representatives to such a Congress.^ 
A committee of eight, headed by Dickinson, was appointed 
to draw up instructions to the delegates, and on this commit- 
tee were men from all parts of the State. The instructions 
call for " loyal and dutiful addresses to the King and the two 
Houses of Parliament . . . drawn up in the most decent 
and respectful terms." It was evident, however, that such 
language, while it might veil, by no means reversed the asser- 
tion of rights which had already been made. On September 
21, 1765,2 the committee on the Stamp Act and other griev- 
ances presented their report to the Assembly. 'After stating 
their past and present willingness to contribute to the support 
of the colonial needs the committee continued : " The Inhab- 
itants of this Province are entitled to all the Liberties, Rights 
and Privileges of his Majesty's subjects in Great Britain or 
elsewhere. . . . The Constitution of Government in this 
Province is founded on the Natural Rights of Mankind, and 
the Noble Principles of English Liberty and therefore is or 
ought to be perfectly free." " It is the inherent Birthright of 
and indubitable Privilege of every British Subject, to be taxed 
only by his own consent or that of his legal Representatives 
in conjunction with his Majesty or his Substitutes." "The 
only legal Representatives of the Inhabitants of this Province 
are the Persons they annually elect to serve as Members of 
Assembly," and "the Taxation of the People of this Province 
by any other Persons whatsoever, than such, their Representa- 
tives in Assembly, is unconstitutional, and subversive of their 
most valuable rights," 

* Votes, V, 419. 

* Votes, V, 426. 



132 TJic Rcvolutmiary Movement in Pen?isylva?iia. 

At the beginning of the session held by the new Assembly- 
October 16, 1765/ the house again ordered its committee of 
correspondence to write the colonial agents in London to 
proceed with the utmost caution in their application for a 
change of government and in no wise to present the petitions 
for such a change if they apprehended there was danger of 
losing any part of the privileges which the colony had a right 
to enjoy under the present charter. In January, 1766, a 
letter written by the colonial agent the previous November 
was read to the Assembly. It declared that the petition for a 
change of government had already been presented. From 
this it is evident that a relief from proprietary control was 
yet the controlling idea in the mind of the agents of Pennsyl- 
vania at London. So far as they could judge Pennsylvania 
regarded international questions as distinctly subordinate to 
questions of local government, and this judgment, so far as the 
feeling of the majority of the Assembly was concerned, was 
correct. When the colonial agents, hearing of the trouble 
occasioned by the acts of Parliament, informed the Assembly 
that the petition for a change of government might be with- 
drawn, the suggestion met with little favor. After some 
debate the Assembly supported its committee, of which Gallo- 
way seemed to be the moving spirit, in directing^ that the peti- 
tions be "prosecuted with the utmost expedition to an issue." 
In the light of these instructions it was little wonder that 
Franklin believed that Pennsylvania held the provisions of 
Parliament regarding stamp duties to be of relatively little 
account. 

If the Stamp Act excited less attention in the Assembly 
than the question of proprietary government, it does not follow 
that such was the case in the city or colony at large. The 
movements in the other states, of which the Assembly was 

' Votes, V, 433. 

2 Votes, V, 454, January 21, 1766. 



The Introduction of International Questiojis. 133 

kept informed by messages to its speaker, were known on the 
streets through communications printed in the press, and Bos- 
ton letters in the Gazette called attention to " the insupport- 
able grievances of the Stamp Act."^ A large share of the 
expense of the last war with France had been borne by the 
colonies, " for which very little if any advantage hath ever 
accrued to themselves,"^ and now this was the reward. The 
colonists were not even allowed to settle in the conquered 
regions although forced to pay additional taxes. " What will 
the people do for money after the new law goes into effect, for 
they can hardly pay their debts at present ?"^ August 22, the 
Gazette gave an account of a meeting held by the freemen of 
Providence, at which a committee was appointed to instruct 
the Assembly how to act, "a proceeding this, that conveys 
the most lively idea of principles nobly patriotic and which 
will, it is to be wished, serve as an example to other towns to 
exert themselves at this crisis and to remind them they are 
entitled to all the privileges of British subjects as long as they 
are denominated such."* 

The idea of violent resistance to the Stamp Act and the 
spectacle of a mass meeting giving instructions to a legal 
assembly were by no means popular with the conservative 
party in Philadelphia, and among others, Dickinson protested 
against such measures. He was not in favor of the proposi- 
tion that business should continue to be transacted by the use 
of other than stamped paper. He had not at this time become 
convinced that extra legal action was necessary, and the result 
proved the truth of his belief Later, in 1774, when it was 
necessary that Pennsylvania should present a united front in 
support of American resistance, Dickinson did not hesitate to 
assume the direction of a movement within the State which 

ijuly 18, 1765. 

2 October 3. 

^ June 13. 

* See accounts from other cities in Gazette of August 29, September 5. 



1 34 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

was without legal sanction, nor to approve actions as radical 
as the use of unstamped paper. With the news of the repeal 
of the Stamp Act, the Assembly at once framed an address of 
thanks to the king and resolved, " That whenever his 
Majesty's service, for the future shall require the Aids of the 
Inhabitants of this Province, and they shall be called upon for 
that Purpose, in a Constitiitional Way, this House and, we 
doubt not all future Assemblies, will think it their indispensable 
Duty to grant such Aids to his Majesty, as the safety of the 
Colonies requires, and the Circumstances and Abilities of this 
Province may permit, unless the Proprietaries' Instructions to 
their Deputy Governors, respecting Proprietary private Interest 
shall continue to interfere y^ 

The Assembly plumed itself upon its own quiet resistance 
in contrast with the more violent methods employed by other 
colonies, and thought such action would make it all the easier 
to bring about that change in government which it had long 
desired.^ Many among the Pennsylvania leaders thought that 
the difficulties with England were over and that no renewal of 
them was to be apprehended. The Declaratory Act was 
regarded as a method of retreat which, if disregarded, would 
amount to nothing, but which, if noticed, might result in fur- 
ther friction.'^ In reality, however, the colony had taken a 
forward step which could never be retraced. 

The conflict over the Stamp Act was of international 
importance, because it showed the substantial unity of Ameri- 
cans regarding their relations to the British Parliament. The 
repeal of the measure laught them the increased strength 
which common action gave, and within particular colonies the 
struggle had a further significance, not at first apparent. The 
tax fell on persons engaged in commercial transactions and it 

1 June 6, 1766 ; Votes, V, 478. Italics are the authors. 

2 Votes, V, 502. 

'See Gazette, May i and 8, 1766. 



The Introduction of International Questions. 135 

had no more intense opponents than the propertied classes of 
Pennsylvania. With the ability to put their arguments in 
permanent form and with the stimulus of a financial grievance 
hurrying them on, the gentry of Philadelphia were induced to 
defend propositions regarding government which undermined 
their own position in the colony and were to be used in later 
years against their own dominance within the State. If the 
general rights of English citizenship forbade the exploitation 
of one portion of the empire by another, they also forbade the 
same proceeding within the State of Pennsylvania. If in 
financial action, the Assembly was determined to allow no 
outside interference, a remedy for colonial injustice must be 
sought by the discontented elements within the State, and as 
the union of all the colonies had secured the repeal of the Act 
against which protest had been made, so union of the various 
discontented factions might be of avail in the injternal dispute. 
The power of illegal gatherings of the people had been illus- 
trated in other colonies and even in the city of Philadelphia. 
More than this, there had appeared the first manifestation of a 
national government to which all Americans could appeal. 
Thenceforth colonial discontents had the foundation of 
national as well as popular sovereignty on which to rely. 



CHAPTER VIII. 

The Argument of Remonstrance, 



Authorities. 

In addition to the authorities mentioned for Chapter VII, the following works 
may be cited: 

The Political Writings of John Dickinson. 

Eddis: Letters from America. 

Graydon: Memoirs of His Own Times. 

Westcott: History of Philadelphia. 

Sharpless and Still6 remain the best secondary authorities for strictly local 
history, although considerable attention is given to Pennsylvania history at this 
period by the more general writers. Professor Tyler's discussion of the Farmer's 
Letters of Dickinson is not only exceedingly discerning, but is very interesting. 
Bancroft and Lecky also give a good review of the general situation. 

With the repeal of the Stamp Act American victory seemed 
complete. The declaratory act injured no one, and the Penn- 
sylvania Assembly turned with relief to the consideration of 
local affairs, but its attention was soon called away by the 
renewal of the international dispute. The emphasis which certain 
American writers like Dulaney, of Maryland, had placed upon 
the injustice of internal taxation, led the British Ministry to 
make its next trial for revenue in connection with foreign 
trade. Smuggling was guarded against, and new duties were 
levied on imports of glass, lead and tea.^ These acts bore 
more hardly upon the prosperity of Pennsylvania than had the 
stamp tax, and this in itself would have increased the colonial 
dissatisfaction with British policy. But this was not sufficient. 
The spirit shown by the ministry in passing the Townshend 
duties heightened the opposition aroused by the taxation im- 
posed. Irritated by the taunts of the minority in Parliament, 
the Chancellor of the Exchequer boasted that it would take 
more than words to induce the government to abandon its 

1 7 Geo. III., chs. 41 and 46. 

(136) 



TJie Argument of Remonstrance. 137 

purpose of obtaining a revenue from America as had been 
done by the Rockingham ministry of the previous year. 
Townshend's official declaration united American opposition 
for it was felt that nothing short of colonial union would make 
colonial resistance effectual. 

As in 1765, Pennsylvania furnished the theoretical defence 
of the American position. The Farmer's Letters began to 
appear in the Philadelphia newspapers early in December, 
1767, and were reprinted throughout the colonies, as well as 
in England and France.^ Much has been said in praise of the 
arguments developed by Dickinson in these papers and of 
their effect in America. With this every student will agree, 
but the ground had already been prepared. It should be 
remembered that the Americans never accepted the British 
interpretation of colonial rights and that any financial burden 
such as was imposed by these acts was especially grievous to 
a people who had been quarreling over questions of taxation 
for a century. In Pennsylvania the troubles over paper money ^ 
and the quartering of soldiers had kept alive the feeling against 
England, and there had been frequent hints that further par- 
liamentary taxation was intended. As early as April the press 
declared that proposals for new taxes were being presented at 
London,^ and a httle later the Gazette confirmed these declara- 
tions by printing a summary of the arguments advanced by 
Franklin and the Board of Trade regarding these proposals.* 
On June 1 1 the same paper remarked that in England "there 
are great heats on the American affair," and the atmosphere 
was no cooler west of the Atlantic. 

At times it was thought that Parliament might recognize 
the justice of the American position and be content to ask 

1 Pennsylvania Chronicle, December 2; Pennsylvania Gazette, December 3, 1767. 

2 The colonial issues had been deprived of their legal tender quality by the 
home government. 

» Gazette, April 23, 1767. 
* May 14, 28; June 4. 



138 TJic Revolutionary Movcincnt in Pcnnsylvaiiia. 

aid from the provincial legislatures. In July there was an 
account given of the debate on George Grenvillc's motion 
" to oblige the Americans to take an oath of allegiance and 
obedience to the Parliament of Great Britain," and "when it 
was put to vote there were found to be for the question ninety, 
against it one hundred and eighty odd." In a later issue 
the Gazette stated that an act compelling all Americans 
to subscribe to a declaration that Parliament had a right to 
tax America in all cases whatsoever, had been defeated. Thus 
the hope that America's friends might control English policy 
and that the king's influence might be found on the colonial 
side was encouraged. In August ^ the bill for duties on tea, 
glass, etc., was given, but " it was hoped it would not come to 
anything." Public opinion, however, recognized that matters 
were again becoming serious, and with this recognition fre- 
quent letters from Boston and Charleston were printed which 
fostered the spirit of freedom and gave repeated threats of 
resistance to attempted tyranny.^ 

October 15, 1767, the London letter in the Gazette declared 
that " the opposition to America seems to increase," and 
in November accounts were given of the New England 
town meetings addressed by Otis and other speakers, not 
only in opposition to the terms of the revenue law, but to 
its object. With this increased revenue, they said, the Crown 
purposes to endow our governors, who in their turn " aim to 
be permanently independent of the Assembly." In December 
the Farmer's Letters began to appear, and soon they 
received the powerful support of Lord Camden's speech 
against the principles of the declaratory act.^ In his view 
taxation and representation were inseparable. " This position 
is founded on the laws of nature, nay more, it is itself an 

' Newspapers July l6 and 26, August 20 and 27. 

2 Gazette, September 17, 1767. 

3 Pennsylvania Gazette November 12 and iq, December 31. 



The Argument of Remonstrance. 139 

eternal law of nature. For whatever is a man's own is abso- 
lutely his own. No man has a right to take it from him 
without his consent either expressed by himself or by his 
representative. Whoever attempts to do it attempts an injury, 
whoever does it commits a robbery." If these words did not 
recognize the existence of a principle back of and superior to 
law, no American writer or speaker can be said to have made 
such a distinction, and the principle found ready acceptance in 
Pennsylvania. 

In the Farmer's Letters Dickinson based his argument 
on the distinction between legislation in which the raising of 
revenue was the primary object, and legislation whose object 
was the regulation of trade or the securing of justice. " Par- 
liament has no power to lay upon these colonies any * tax ' 
whatever, that is, any imposition upon the subject for the sole 
purpose of raising money." He thus differed fundamentally 
from the English theory of law according to which there was 
no limit to parliamentary authority. In so far therefore as he 
placed " the constitution " above " the law," he was in 
harmony with other American leaders, and the fact that he 
placed the constitutional limitation at a different point than 
they, does not make his position less radical. As a matter 
of fact, the distinction between taxation for the purpose of 
revenue and that for the purpose of trade, was weaker than 
the distinction between taxation and no taxation, and much 
less defensible than the claim that " our provincial legislatures 
are the only supreme authorities in our colonies." ^ 

Early in the struggle Dickinson had said in regard to 
colonial rights : * " I hope these colonies will never, to their 
latest existence, want understanding sufficient to discover the 
intention of those who rule over them, nor the resolution 
necessary for asserting their interests. They will always 

^ John Adams in Novanglus. 
2 Works, I, 202. 



140 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

have the same rights that all free states have, of judging 
when their privileges are invaded." The course which such 
resistance should take he had already discussed : " Every 
government at some time or other falls into wrong measures. 
This may proceed from mistake or passion. But every such 
measure does not dissolve the obligation between the gov- 
ernors and the governed. The mistake may be corrected ; 
the passion may subside. It is the duty of the governed to 
endeavor to rectify the mistake and to appease the passion. 
They have not at first any other right than to represent 
their grievances and to pray for redress, unless an emergence 
is so pressing, as not to allow time for receiving an answer to 
their application, which rarely happens. If their applications 
are disregarded, then tJiat ki)id of opposition becomes justifiable 
which can be made zvithout breaking the laws or disturbing the 
public peace. . . . If at length it becomes undoubted 
that an inveterate resolution is formed to annihilate the liber- 
ties of the governed, English history affords frequent examples 
of resistance by force."' 

Thus the ultimate remedy of the Pennsylvanian was the 
same as that proposed by his more radical fellow-countrymen. 
Pamphlets urging colonial rights were in circulation in Phila- 
delphia, and Dickinson must have seen that when constitu- 
tional resistance failed some other mode must be attempted. 
In number eleven of the Farmer's Letters he wrote," with 
reference to the revolution of 1648 in England : " On the 
other hand, oppressions and dissatisfactions being permitted to 
accumulate — if ever the governed throw off the load they 
will do more. A people does not reform with modera- 
tion." "It was in vain for prudent and moderate men to 
insist in 1648 that there was no necessity to abolish royalty. 
Nothing less than the utter destruction of monarchy, could 

1 Works, I, 169. Italics are the authors. 
« Works, I, 256. 



The Argtimcnt of Remonstrance. 141 

satisfy those who had sufifered and thought they had reason 
to believe they always should suffer under it." Occasionally 
Dickinson seemed to agree that a similar crisis had come in 
America. When in 1774 he " heartily concurred" in the 
calling of a state convention, the basis of whose election was 
the district committees, and whose object was undoubtedly to 
dictate to the regular Assembly, if not to replace it, he was 
practically aiding a revolution.^ Whatever his intention, he 
was playing with fire in arousing his colony in such a manner. 
In no State was there a larger percentage of non-English 
races and non-English religions than in Pennsylvania, 
Germans, Dutch, Swedes, Welsh, Scotch and Irish formed a 
majority of the inhabitants, and none of these elements felt 
any identity with England. At no time had they more than 
a passive spirit of attraction to Great Britain, and nothing 
could have been more active than the opposition oi the Irish 
or German element when once aroused.^ 

Evidence of the popularity of the Farmer's Letters is 
easily obtained and it is not surprising that they were eagerly 
read by Americans. Whether they were regarded as the 
formal statement of the colonial argument or were considered 
as preliminary to an appeal to force they were equally effec- 
tive. All Americans were willing to uphold their position by 
logic and some would go further. These letters called forth 
violent harangues on the ultimate necessity of forcible resist- 
ance even in Philadelphia, while elsewhere the author was 
assumed to be willing, if necessary, to follow the example of 
the English Puritans.^ 

The applause which Dickinson received led him to over- 
estimate his influence and he was later to find that he had 
furnished arguments for a movement which he was unable to 

^ See Charles Thomson's statement, Stille, p. 345. 

* See on this point the Penn. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., of January, 1899 ; and 
Graydon, Memoirs, p. 106. 

5 See A Freeborn American in Pennsylvania Gazette, February 18, 1768. 



142 TJic Rcvohitio7iary Movcuioit in Pennsylvania. 

check. The protests from Massachusetts and Virginia were 
framed by men no less skillful in expression than was the 
Pennsylvania leader, and they had the advantage of being 
willing to follow their argument to its logical conclusion. 
Massachusetts declared : " The superintending authority of 
his majesty's high court of Parliament over the whole empire 
in all cases which can consist with the fundamental rights of 
the constitution was never questioned in this province,"^ 
but when those constitutional rights were violated the north- 
ern leaders did not hesitate to resist. Dickinson did his 
work in convincing the people that Parliament was not 
omnipotent. Once confirmed in this belief they could be 
relied upon to fix the limit of its power in accordance with 
their own ideas of colonial interest. By the writings of Locke, 
of Montesquieu and of Sydney the readers of the Farmer's 
Letters had already ascertained the way in which the English 
Constitution came into existence ; their own charters and his- 
tory had taught them that there was an authority superior to 
the legislature, and now they were shown that Englishmen 
had not hesitated to overthrow the monarchy when it stood 
in the way of justice. The illustration was taken as a model. 
Dickinson argued that the least infraction of a rule was the 
greatest danger, for the commercial classes could with diffi- 
culty be persuaded to resist such an invasion until a precedent 
had been established, — a very effective argument in Pennsyl- 
vania, — and finally he clearly demonstrated that economic 
necessity demanded financial legislation by persons familiar 
with colonial needs and by them alone. Having succeeded 
in confirming the opinion already prevalent in America that 
England's action was unjustifiable on constitutional or histori- 
cal grounds and that it was economically ruinous to America, 
Dickinson recommended English history as the text-book of 
future action, seeming to forget that the Puritan and Stuart 

^Protest and Letter in Pennsylvania Gazette, April 14, 1768. 



The Argument of Remonstrance. I43 

rebellions had given the English throne during the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries the reputation of being the most 
unstable in Europe. It was neither constitutional resistance 
nor defensive war that had twice overthrown the Stuart 
dynasty in England, and there were leaders in Pennsylvania 
as there had been in England who would not see in fruitless 
remonstrances the true remedy for grievances against either 
the colonial or the national government. 

According to the good old English custom the people as 
well as the assemblies began to organize movements against 
the British policy. On April 25, 1768, a meeting of the mer- 
chants of Philadelphia was held, at which resolutions, prob- 
ably framed by Dickinson, were adopted protesting against 
various English laws. First, the law of 1749, forbidding the 
making of steel or the erecting of steel furnaces was mentioned, 
for " there are not above five or six persons In England 
engaged in that branch of business who are so far from being 
able to supply what is wanted that great quantities of steel 
are yearly imported from Germany." Other laws protested 
against were those forbidding plating and slitting mills and 
tilt-hammers, "though iron is the produce of our own coun- 
try and from our manner of building, planting and living we 
are under the necessity of using vast quantities of nails and 
plated iron ; " those restraining hatters and prohibiting the 
export of hats ; those prohibiting the colonial trade in wool 
and woolens, and those prohibiting exports to Europe except 
through England. Other grievances were the duties on sugar, 
molasses and imports from Europe and East India, and the 
practice of transporting criminals to the new world. The 
protest closed with an appeal to Americans "never to forget 
that our Strength depends upon our union and our Liberty 
upon our Strength." 

Practically the same arguments were advanced in the Assem- 
bly. On May 20, 1 768, the speaker laid before the house a 



144 T^^'-'-' Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

letter from the Massachusetts Legislature which described the 
action of that body on the question of colonial privileges. 
Disavowing all desire to dictate/ the New England body 
declared it unconstitutional for Parliament to tax imports in 
both England and America. The British Constitution recog- 
nized that America, because of distance and local circum- 
stances, never could be equitably represented in the British 
Parliament. The rights of nature and the rights of English- 
men were considered as identical in the assertion " that it is 
an essential, unalterable Right in Nature, ingrafted into the 
British Constitution as a fundamental Law and ever held 

^The letter which the Massachusetts Assembly sent out assured the other 
colonial bodies that no intention of dictating the proper course was intended — 
[Pa. Archives, IV, 2S6]. — "The House is fully satisfied that your Assembly is 
too generous and enlarged in sentiment to believe that this Letter proceeds from an 
ambition of taking the head or dictating to the Other Assemblies. They freely 
submit their opinion to the Judgement of Others and shall take it kind in your 
House to point out to them anything further which may be thought necessary." 
The Colonial Records — [April 21, 176S,] — contain the letter of Lord Hills- 
borough to the Governor of Pennsylvania regarding this communication from 
Massachusetts. After expressing his confidence that the Assembly would pay no 
attention to " this unjustifiable attempt to revive those Distractions which have 
operated so fatally to the prejudice of this kingdom and her colonies,' ' he added 
that if the Assembly should show a disposition to attend to it, " it will be your Duty 
to prevent any proceeding upon it, by an immediate Prorogation or Dissolution." 
The Pennsylvania Assembly seems to have agreed with the Massachusetts senti- 
ments. Speaking of New England's influence in 1768, Gordon in his American 
Revolution (I, p. 219) says : "The New England spirit of patriotism and economy 
was greatly approved of at Philadelphia ; and it was said, that ' if America is 
saved from its impending danger, New England will be its acknowledged guar- 
dian.' " Dickinson himself wrote in reply to New England commendation of his 
Farmer's Letters : " Never will my heart become insensible, till insensible of all 
worldly things, of the unspeakable obligation I owe to the inhabitants of the Massa- 
chusetts Bay, for the vigilance with which they have watched over, and the mag- 
nanimity with which they have maintained the liberties of the British colonies on 
this continent." Not until New England measures had become connected in 
their mind with Pennsylvania democracy did the Pennsylvania merchants resent 
her supremacy. From then the Boston patriots were represented as men of low 
birth, unable to restrain their passions and allied with the " Presbyterian and 
democratic rioters" of their own colony. 



The Argument of Remonstrance. 145 

sacred and irrevocable by the subjects within the Realm, that 
what a Man has honestly acquired is absolutely his own, which 
he may freely give but which cannot be taken from him with- 
out his consent ; that the American Subjects may therefore, 
exclusive of any consideration of Charter Rights, with a 
decent Firmness adapted to the Character of Freemen and 
Subjects assert their Natural Constittitiojial Right. . . . 
The Supreme legislature derives its Authority from the Con- 
stitution and can not overleap the Bounds of it without 
destroying its own Foundation." 

On September 13, 1768,^ after the summer adjournment, a 
letter was presented to the Assembly from Lord Hillsborough 
which spoke of the communication from Massachusetts as a 
"measure of most dangerous and factious tendency," and 
with it a message from the House of Representatives of Vir- 
ginia differing little in tone from the earlier New England com- 
munication. The reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to 
Lord Hillsborough may be found in the resolutions of Sep- 
tember 16,^ which declared "that it is the undoubted Right 
of the Assemblies of this Province to correspond with the 
Representatives of the Freemen of any of his Majesty's Colo- 
nies in America, relative to Grievances which may affect the 
General Welfare of those Colonies." To the threats of adjourn- 
ment and dissolution which the Secretary had empowered the 
Governor to use, the representatives replied by asserting that 
" the Governors of this Province have not any constitutional 
Authority to prorogue or dissolve the Colonial Assembly." 

The Pennsylvania legislators made their attitude very clear 
regarding the matter at issue between England and America. 
In their opinion, the position taken by the English Parliament 
was in manifest violation of those rights of man which the 
English Constitution had recognized as the heritage of Eng- 

1 Votes, VI, 63. 
'■« Votes, VI, 93. 
10 



146 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pejmsylvania. 

lishmcn. Other nations might have allowed those rights to 
fall into abeyance but the emigrants to America had left 
England to prevent this unhappy result. In America, these 
rights had not been taken from them and they had been 
" under a firm Persuasion that the Enjoyment and full Exercise 
thereof would be continued down to your People of this 
Colony, and their latest Posterity. . . . This taxation, we 
most humbly apprehend, is destructive of those Rights and 
that Freedom which they are by Birth intitled to, as Men and 
Englishmen." These rights, "have been recognized by long 
established Usage and Custom ever since the Settlement of 
this Province, without one Precedent to the contrary, until 
the passing of the Stamp-Act."' In its address to the Com- 
mons, the Assembly declared that the motives under which 
their Ancestors came to this wilderness "were not only to 
enlarge the British Empire but to enjoy that perfect security 
of Liberty to which they were entitled as British Subjects in 
their Native Land." Arguments against the economical inex- 
pediency of the British measures were not put in the petition, 
"lest seeming to rely on the latter" the constitutional argu- 
ment should be weakened. The argument of the Assembly 
found further expression in the press and pamphlet literature 
of the time. Alone among the nations of Europe the English 
had taken care never to delegate the taxing powers to an 
irresponsible parliament nor to the king. When the king 
owned large estates of land he had power to use the rentals as 
he saw fit and if the later land holders wished to grant him 
aids they could do so, but that was no proof that taxation 
and legislation were synonyms.^ 

The attitude of Benjamin Franklin at this time is a good 

' Votes, VI, 103. 

' Among other writers who were educating the people of the middle colonies 
along the lines of government by their own right may be mentioned Richard 
Bland, of Virginia, whose pamphlet of 1 769 entitled "An Enquiry into the 
Rights of the British Colonies," had a considerable circulation in Philadelphia, 



The Argument of Rcmonstrajice. 147 

indication of the change of sentiment which was taking place 
in Pennsylvania. A few years before, he had doubted whether 
Philadelphia would make or even attempt any effective resist- 
ance to the Stamp Act. He had therefore at that time coun- 
seled submission to English demands. By 1767 he began to 
realize that there was fertile ground in America for the growth 
of a new nation, and he wrote to Lord Kames '} " Every Act 
of oppression . , . will hasten their final revolt : for the 
seeds of liberty are universally found there and nothing can 
eradicate them." His cautiousness is seen in his letter recom- 
mending Pennsylvania to adopt the Boston resolutions to use 
home manufactures, to be frugal and import little, but giz>e as 
the ostensible reason for frugality a desire to save in order to pay 
English debts} A little later he had come to believe that 
" the government [of America] can not long be retained without 
Union" {i.e., representation in parliament), and by 1769 he 
was an advocate of colonial independence from the British 
legislature. This shows on the one hand an advance in senti- 
ment in Pennsylvania, for Frankhn did not keep much ahead 
of the people whom he represented, and on the other it is evi- 
dence of a greater advance soon to follow, for his teaching was 
accepted by the more moderate classes with great respect,^ 

Meanwhile, in Maryland, and more particularly in such 
sections of the colony as had close relations with Pennsylvania, 

and whose sentiments were frequently quoted by other writers. He maintained, 
as a fundamental premise, quoting Locke and Vattel as his authority, that all 
governments were founded upon the consent of the governed and that Parlia- 
ment, as representing the people, could not deprive a part of that people of the 
rights of election and representation. People continuing to live in England con- 
sented to virtual representation but those going to colonies dissented and, there- 
fore, were not bound by Parliament. 

^ Works, Bigelow edition, III, 8. 

2 Works, III, 6l. Italics are the authors. 

' A few quotations from his writings of this period are given. To William 
Strahan, November 29, 1769 [Works, IV, 290]: "A submission to Acts of Par- 
liament was no part of the original constitution." Only by the very wisest use 



148 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the sentiment of hostility to Great Britain was advancing yet 

of the power claimed by Parliament could it, in Franklin's opinion, be made a part 
of the frame of government accepted in America. 

" The Parliament of England never presumed to interfere in that prerogative 
[the government of the colonies] till the time of the great rebellion. . . . The 
colonies that held for the king they conquered by force of arms and governed 
afterward as conquered countries, but New England not having opposed the 
Parliament {i. e., as an executive in place of Charles), was treated and considered 
as a sister kingdom" [Works, IV, 292]. 

" Our kings have ever had dominions not subject to the English Parliament. At 
first the provinces of France, of which Jersey and Guernsey remain, were always 
governed by their own laws, appealing to the king in council only and not to our 
courts or the House of Lords." In Scotland and Ireland, the Colonies, Hanover, 
he continues, each assembly is absolute. ''This is the only clear idea of their real 
present condition. Their only bond of union is the King " [Works, IV, 309]. 

"They [Parliament] may still if it pleases them keep up their claim to the 
right of granting our [money] ... a right that can be of no good use to 
them" [Works, IV, 295]. "The Americans think that while they can retain 
the right of disposing of their own money they shall thereby secure all their 
other rights. They have therefore not yet disputed your other pretensions" 
[Works IV, 311]. "The Charters can not be altered but by consent of both 
parties, the King and the colonies" [Works, IV, 303]. "The king can not 
bring troops raised in Ireland and quarter them in England but with consent of 
Parliament," [307] arguing from this that the consent of Assemblies is necessary 
in America. "It is doubted whether any settlement of the crown by Parliament 
takes place in the colonies otherwise than by the consent of the assemblies there. 
Had the rebellion in 1745 succeeded so far as to settle the Stuart family again 
on the throne by act of Parliament, I think the colonies would not have thought 
themselves bound by such an act" [Works, IV, 301]. 

There are also expressions such as these in his writings : 

"If you break the Charters or violate them you dissolve all ties between us " 
[Works, IV, 317]. In 1771, Franklin wrote to Gushing [February 5 ; Works, 
IV, 378]: "The doctrine of the right of Parliament to lay taxes on America is 
now almost generally given up here and one seldom meets in conversation with 
any one who continues to assert it." He considered the dignity of Parliament as 
the reason preventing a formal renunciation. In regard to petitions he said 
[p. 313]: "Late experience has fully shown that American petitions and 
remonstrances are little regarded in Britain." His claim for Americans is not 
merely a position as good as that of Englishmen. "They may challenge all 
that was promised them by charters to encourage them to settle here. They have 
performed their part of the contract and therefore have a right to expect the per- 
formance of the other part. They have by the risks and expenses they have 
incurred, additional merit and are therefore to be considered as above the level of 
other subjects'''' [Works, IV, 316]. 



The Arguinoit of Remonstrance. 149 

more rapidly than in the northern colony. By their action at 
this time, the Marylanders were setting a precedent which was 
later followed in Pennsylvania, a precedent which enabled the 
country districts to obtain an influence of which unjust repre- 
sentation had deprived them. On June 20, 1769, country 
gentlemen from all over the province came as delegates to a 
convention at Annapolis, and there passed sweeping resolutions 
against imports, and at the same time forbade the merchants 
raising prices in the colony because of scarcity of goods. 
No deviation from their regulations was to be allowed until 
either the British Parliament retracted the offensive laws or a 
meeting of the whole province demanded such action. As an 
outcome of this extra-legal assemblage, the Lower House of the 
Maryland Legislature, at its next session in November,^ passed 
resolutions modeled upon those of Virginia and sent them to 
the Pennsylvania house.^ 

The Upper House at first attempted to defeat the action of 
the Assembly, but a mass meeting in Annapolis supported the 
Convention and Assembly, so that the council was forced to 
yield. Eddis, in his Letters from America, said of the 
movement in Maryland: ^ " It is a certain fact that the statute 
imposing duties on glass, paper and tea has undermined the 
foundation of the cordiality which the repeal of the Stamp 
Act had happily re-established. ... A spirit of discon- 
tent and disunion is universally predominant." 

Both in Maryland and Pennsylvania this discontent and 
disunion were most marked among the producing classes. 
The merchants protested against the Acts of Parliament, but 
their relations with their fellows in London, the fact that such 
taxes fell upon the consumer rather than upon themselves, 
and their rivalry for the provincial trade, make their resistance 

1 Proceedings of 1769, p. 248. Vote of December 20. 

2 The Maryland counties had by individual action forbidden English imports, 
even before the meeting of the Annapolis Convention. 

' Page 62. 



150 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in rennsylvania. 

less enduring than that of other elements among the people. 
From the outset the merchants relied on the protests which 
the English trade interests were making to the king,^ and 
when those protests seemed to fail there was a general weak- 
ening. Indeed, the Quaker business houses seem to have 
disapproved of opposition from the beginning, and where indi- 
viduals took a more resolute attitude they were among the first 
to weaken.^ 

With this falling away of the traders the great consuming 
classes had no sympathy. Increase in the price of imports 
began to be charged against the merchants as well as against 
the tax. The popular spirit became aroused, the extra-legal 
movement was taken up and threats of violence were made 
to hold the merchants in line. Whatever may be said of the 
attitude taken by the conservatives, the radicals did not insist 
upon legality so much as upon effectiveness. Old jealousies 
were revived as soon as the aristocratic classes began to 
weaken, and the movement against England coalesced with 
the movement against the colonial government. 

' See the quotations from the Public I.edger and other articles in the Penn- 
sylvania Gazette, April 20, 1769. 

^Graydon, Memoirs, p. 104. The weakening of the merchants of Philadel- 
phia is reflected very clearly in the press. In October, 1769, there is a jubilant 
account of the forced return to Great Britain of a vessel loaded with English 
merchandise. The reason why no English goods could be landed had been 
explained by the Philadelphia merchants in a letter to their London brethren in 
August. In May of the next year fifteen dealers assert: " We are very sensible 
that the prosperity of the colonies depends upon their Union and Connexion with 
Great Britain. . . . Nothing less than a repeal of all the revenue acts 
and putting things on the same footing they were before the late innovations can 
or will satisfy the minds of the people. . . . The merchants here and 
in England are the links that bind the countries together." 

Small sales and decreased profits soon changed this attitude of resolution. It 
was recognized that the merchants could be trusted to oppose Parliament only so 
long as the London dealers did the same, and by October, 1770, the hope was 
expressed that in spite of the weakening of the merchants, the consumers at least 
would remain true to American ideals — [Gazette, 1769, October 5; I770> ^^^7 
10; 1770, October li]. 



CHAPTER IX. 
The Law and the Constitution. 



Authorities. 
The pamphlets and newspapers as mentioned: Reed's Life of Reed; Watson's 
Annals; Charles Thomson's Statement; Well's Life of Samuel Adams; Austin's 
Gerry; The Works of John Adams; The Colonial Records; The Letters of 
Thomas Wharton, and Westcott's History of Philadelphia. Sharpless and Stille 
give the best secondary accounts of this period. 

When the ship " Charming, Polly " came to Philadelphia in 
July, 1769, with a cargo of malt consigned to Amos Strettel, 
a meeting of the citizens was immediately held at the State 
House. This gathering resolved that any person engaged in 
purchasing, selling, handling or storing the cargo had not 
" a just sense of liberty" and "was an enemy to his country," 
Strettel declared that he knew nothing of the' consignment, 
the brewers of the city agreed neither to purchase nor to brew 
any part of the malt, and the ship was compelled to return 
with her cargo untouched. Concerning these actions, Israel 
Pemberton wrote to his brother on July 24 : " The imprudent 
conduct of the committee, of which John Reynell is unhappily 
the first, both filled us with trouble and difficulty. If thou seeth 
the papers thou wilt find they have been so wild as to collect 
ye inhabitants, and by their resolves oblige an honest man 
from Yarmouth with a cargo of malt (a commodity much 
wanted) to take back his cargo. They are brought to see 
their folly, but can not now remedy it nor prevent much 
disgrace falling on ye city and partly on Friends by the part 
they have acted therein." 

Succeeding months proved the truth of Pemberton's final 
statement, for as the non-importation agreement began to 
diminish the profits of the merchants without producing the 
desired effect upon England, the commercial classes grew 

(iSi) 



152 TJic Revolutionary Alovcntcnt in Pennsylvania. 

lukewarm in its support. On July 14 the meeting at the 
State House had resolved: "that the non-importation agree- 
ment entered into by the merchants and traders is a safe and 
peaceable way of asserting right ; that the good effects of the 
measure will depend on perseverance, and the strength of the 
colonists consists in their union." In September, sixteen 
merchants informed the merchant committee that they had 
suffered enough for adherence to an abstract principle, and 
demanded an inquiry to see whether or not the non-importa- 
tion agreement should be abandoned. Although the com- 
mittee refused to go around and gather individual opinions on 
this question, the dissatisfied merchants were not to be balked 
from securing their desire. On September 20, 1770, the dis- 
contented traders held a meeting at Davenport's tavern, and 
"it was determined by a great majority" that the non-impor- 
tation agreement as it then stood should be altered and that 
" the alteration proposed should be to open the importation 
of goods from Great Britain and other parts of Europe, except 
teas and such other articles as may be subject to duties for 
the purpose of raising a revenue in America." The gathering 
declared further : " It will not be for the reputation of this city 
to consult the other colonies before any breach is made in the 
present agreement." Some of the committee attended the 
meeting and tried to prevent this radical action, but they were 
defeated, and the practical breaking down of the agreement 
was carried by a vote of 89 to 45.^ Upon this vote being 

^The action of the merchants in rescinding the agreement called forth a protest 
from " Citizen." He declared that non-consumption must now take the place of 
non-importation. "We should readily have adopted the political creed of our 
patriot farmer and most heartily joined with him in wishing that the colonies 
might be dependent on the mother country ' as far as one free people can be 
dependent upon another,' nor would any real friend of America have desired to 
suggest a thought of independence while there was the least hope of maintaining 
a CONSTITUTIONAL CONNECTION." From this it is evident that as early as 1770 
there were some in Pennsylvania who saw the probable result of the quarrel 
between England and America — [Pennsylvania Gazette, October li, 1770]. 



The Law a)id the Constitution. 153 

taken, all but one of the members of the committee who had 
signed the protest against this irregular action resigned their 
positions. 

Meanwhile the supporters of the trade war against England 
were using two methods to maintain their position. "Trades- 
man " and other writers denounced the meeting at Davenport's 
as a sacrifice of the " credit and liberties of the province of 
Pennsylvania to the interests of a few merchants in Philadel- 
phia" and as "an exchange of our birthright privileges for 
the paltry luxuries of Great Britain." "Shall the grand 
question whether America shall be free or not, be determined 
by a few men whose support and importance must always 
be in proportion to the distresses of our country?" These 
remonstrants were willing that the agreement which Maryland 
had adopted should be the model for Pennsylvania, but they 
considered it disgraceful for a {^^^ merchants of 'the city to 
break down all trade barriers without consulting other colonies 
or even the people of Philadelphia itself As a result of this 
sentiment a meeting was held at the State House and to the 
members who had resigned at the earlier meeting nine others 
were added, the whole forming a new committee to secure a 
new agreement. The principles adopted were the maintenance 
of the constitutional rights of the colonies, united action on 
the lines followed by Maryland, and the support of the 
merchants and traders signing the new plan. 

Another method by which it was sought to maintain a firm 
front against legal importation was the encouragement of 
smuggling. No article that had paid the king's duties could 
be used by patriots, but the same article was highly enjoyable 
in case it came up the Delaware or Chesapeake untouched 
by the revenue officials.^ Informers against the smugglers 

1 "There was no want of tea here. Plenty could be had at five shillings a 
pound, presumably Dutch" — [Ettwein's Narrative. See also A Brief Account 
of the Disturbance in America]. 



154 T^f^^ Rcvoh<tio7iary Movement in Pemisylvaftia. 

received harsher treatment than did the men who opposed the 
non-importation agreements. Both the Gazette and Chronicle 
gave their readers full accounts of the punishment of John 
Keats, who was guilty of this crime against the people. In 
November, 1771, a much more serious offence occurred. The 
smuggling along the Delaware had become so marked that 
the revenue collector had put a light vessel into service to 
break up the practice. On November 23, Thomas Mushett, 
captain of this vessel, captured a pilot boat coming up the 
river, bringing thirty-six boxes of tea, sixteen boxes of claret 
and some gin — " a variety of contraband goods," as Collector 
Swift expressed it in his report to the governor. Owing to 
the tide, the schooner and her prize could not reach the city 
that day, but anchored some miles below at Red Bank, " after 
setting one of the men who worked the said pilot boat ashore 
at his own request. . . . Between nine and ten o'clock 
the same night," continues the report, "the boat was boarded 
by upward of thirty Men in disguise, armed with Cutlashes, 
Clubs, and other Offensive Weapons, who violently attacked 
and cruelly cut and wounded the said Thomas Mushett and 
two of his People, and confining them and the rest of the crew in 
the Hold of the said schooner, did considerable damage to her 
by cutting her Sails and Rigging, &c., and afterward Rescued 
and carried off the said Pilot Boat with her lading."^ Although 
Governor Penn issued a proclamation against the offenders 
they were never apprehended. The next year a more power- 
ful vessel was placed in commission to enforce the revenue 
laws, and at once complaints were made that the officers " fire 
at, bring to, ransack and swear and tear at every vessel, shal- 
lop or flat that they can lay their eyes on, stopping men in 
their lawful business, putting his majesty's subjects in fear of 
their lives and liberties, and in a most underhand manner take 
every low means to obtain intelligence." Yet the practice of 
smuggling was by no means broken up. 
» Colonial Records, X, 8-15. 



The Law and the Constitution. 155 

Meanwhile the trade regulations had been again considered 
by the Assembly. February 4, 1771, "upon motion by a 
member that part of the Duties imposed by a late Act of 
Parliament on certain articles imported into the Colonies 
remains unrepealed and that great danger to the Rights of 
Americans is justly apprehended from the continuance of such 
a precedent for taxing them without their consent," a com- 
mittee was appointed to frame a petition to the Crown for 
relief In this petition (March 5) it was again asserted that 
"we demand no new right but that which we constantly till 
of late enjoyed." No further official action was taken by the 
Assembly until after the passage of the Boston Port Bill. 
Resolutions were received from other colonial assemblies and 
were read to the Pennsylvania House on September 21, 1773, 
but as it was then on the point of adjourning, the Assembly 
referred these messages to its successor.^ Thaf body in turn 
took no decisive action upon them, although on December 1 5 
it received the resolutions of Delaware (of October 23) and on 
January 18 those of Maryland (of October 15). During this 
period popular indignation was becoming more and more 
aroused.^ 

Although there was a large amount of tea consumed in 
Pennsylvania during these years, comparatively little paid 
any import duty. To persuade the people to accept the prin- 
ciple of parliamentary taxation, and at the same time to concil- 

1 Votes, VI, 462. 

2 Other resolutions received by the Pennsylvania Assembly were those of Vir- 
ginia, passed March 12, urging the establishment of a Committee of Correspon- 
dence ; Massachusetts, passed May 28 ; Connecticut, passed May 21 ; Rhode 
Island, passed May 7 ; all of which supported the Virginia suggestion. It is 
significant of the influences most important in Pennsylvania at this time, that 
Thomas Wharton, hardly mentioning the northern colonies, declared, in a letter 
to a friend (June 10) : " We follow after Virginia and Maryland, and on the 15th 
a general meeting is to be held in this city, when it is not doubted that the 
greatest numbers will attend that was ever known on any occasion" — [Wharton 
Manuscript in Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania]. 



I 56 TJie Revolutionary Movcmcjit in Pennsylvania. 

iate the powerful East India Company, the English ministry 
agreed to exempt such tea as was exported from England 
from the home duty. This enabled the British merchants to sell 
tea in Philadelphia lower than at home and smuggling became 
no longer profitable. At once an effort was made again to 
build up the colonial trade but the Americans were alive to 
the importance of the occasion. The press gave warning that 
importations might be expected/ and it was intimated that the 
merchants to whom the tea was consigned occupied the same 
position of hostility to American interests that Hughes and 
the other stamp agents had held in 1765. It was urged that 
they should be waited upon and persuaded to send back the 
consignment, and if unwilling, they should be compelled to 
act like men. In furtherance of this program, there were 
articles by "Scaevola" and "A Countryman," who hoped 
that the warehouses in which the tea was to be placed were 
" properly constructed." They must be " great curiosities ; 
doubtless they are built of stone or petrified wood called 
asbestos, in which case they will be secured from trifling acci- 
dents . . . for they might pass through the fire and not 
be consumed." ■' Other articles on the duty of true and patriotic 

'Gazette and Chronicle ; June 23, August il, September 27, 1773. 

2 The following is Reed's opinion of American feeling at this time, given in a 
letter to Dartmouth of December 22 : " The [Tea] Act being expressly declared 
to be for the purpose of raising a revenue in America, has been generally con- 
sidered as a law imposing a tax without the consent of the Americans and there- 
fore to be resisted. The reasoning upon which this inference is drawn is founded 
on the distinction between duties for the regulation of trade and raising a revenue, 
and upon the obligation of the colonists to take those articles from Great Britain 
only. Notwithstanding the many objections to which these positions are liable 
among speculative men, they are too grateful to America not to be universally 
received and practiced upon." On the 27th he wrote : " Any further attempt to 
enforce this act, I am humbly of opinion, must end in blood. We are sensible 
of our inability to contend with the mother country by force, but we are hastening 
fast to desperate resolutions, and unless internal peace is speedily settled, our 
most wise and sensible citizens dread the anarchy and confusion that must ensue. 
This city has been distinguished for its peaceable and regular demeanor . 



TJic Law and the Co7istituiion. 157 

Pennsylvanians were by " Mechanic," " Amicus " and par- 
ticularly " Rusticus," who, from his position in the country, 
advised the city to be strong. 

A public meeting to protest against the importation of the 
tea was held on October 18, at the State House, and in true 
town meeting style it was resolved: ^ (i) " That the disposal 
of their property is the inherent right of freemen ; that there 
can be no property in that which another can of right take 
from us without our consent ; that the claim of Parliament to 
tax America is, in other words, a claim of right to ^levy con- 
tributions upon us at pleasure. (2) That the duty imposed 
by Parliament upon tea landed in America is a tax on Ameri- 
cans or levying contributions upon them without their con- 
sent. (3) That the express purpose for which the tax is 
levied upon the Americans, namely, for the support of govern- 
ment, administration of justice, and defence of his Majesty's 
dominions in America, has a direct tendency to render Assem- 
blies useless and to introduce arbitrary government and slavery. 
(4) That a virtuous and steady opposition to this ministerial 
plan of governing America is absolutely necessary to preserve 
even a shadow of liberty, and is a duty which every freeman 
in America owes to his country, to himself, and to his pos- 
terity. (5) That the resolution lately entered into by the 
East India Company to send out their teas to America, sub- 
ject to the payment of duties on its being landed here, is an 
open attempt to enforce this ministerial plan and a violent 
attack upon the liberties of America. (6) That it is the duty of 
every man to oppose this attempt. (7) That whoever shall, 
directly, or indirectly, countenance this attempt, or in any wise 
aid and abet in unloading, receiving or vending the tea sent or 

but the frequent appeals to the people must in time occasion a change, and we 
every day perceive it more and more difficult to repress the rising spirit" — [Life 
of Reed ; I, 51 and 55]. 

^ Pennsylvania Gazette, October 20 and December 29, 1773. 



158 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

to be sent out by the East India Company while it remains 
subject to the payment of a duty here, is an enemy to his 
country. (8) That a committee be immediately chosen to 
wait on those gentlemen, who, it is reported, are appointed by 
the East India Company to receive and sell said tea, and 
request them, from a regard to their own character and the 
peace and good order of the city and province, immediately to 
resign their appointment." 

In considering these resolutions it should be noted that the 
public was called upon to support an entirely illegal gather- 
ing and a committee was authorized, under a scarcely veiled 
threat of violence, to compel merchants to act as the well- 
being of the state demanded. In other words, an absolute 
usurpation of executive authority was directed, on the plea 
that constitutional right was endangered. 

Among the supposed consignees of the expected cargo no 
one was more suspected than the aristocratic Thomas Wharton, 
— the Marquis of Barrataria, as Goddard had called him. 
His bearing at the time of the Stamp Act had not endeared 
him to the populace, and the Chronicle notified him that he 
now might partially atone for his conduct at that time. Tar 
and feathers were said to be the portion of any pilot who 
guided the ship up the river, and the " Committee for Tarring 
and Feathering" announced "that whoever is committed to 
us as an Offender against the Rights of America will experi- 
ence the utmost exertion of our abilities." ^ 

' Although Wharton was probably somewhat affected by the rumors of the treat- 
ment reserved for merchants receiving the British tea, he had other reasons for 
assuming an attitude different from that of 1765. lie had formed a company to 
take possession of lands in the west, from which the proclamation line had 
excluded him, and his trade profits had been decreased by the lack of protection 
from the Indians [Gazette, February 25 and March 3, 1768]. Wharton was 
very desirous to smooth over the trouble between king and colony, and for the 
accomplishment of this aim it was necessary to remain on fairly good tenns with 
both parties to the dispute. He was sufficiently shrewd to see that unless matters 
were very carefully managed there would be an open break with England. In 



Tlic Law and tlic Constitutmi. 159 

A letter to the captain of the " Polly Ayers " was given to all 
pilots on the river, and they were requested to furnish him with 
a copy as soon as possible. In the letter this pleasant 
question was asked : " What think you, Captain, of a Halter 
round your Neck, Ten gallons of liquid Tar decanted on 
your Pate, with the Feathers of a dozen wild Geese laid over 
that to enliven your Appearance?" The news of the treat- 
ment which the tea consigned to Boston had received 
(December 16) was the cause of much congratulation, and when 
the "Polly Ayers" came to port at Chester on December 
25 the city was ready. A town meeting was at once held, at 
which Captain Ayers was present, and the sentiment of the 
city expressed in no uncertain manner.' Among other reso- 
lutions it was voted "that this Assembly highly approves of 
the conduct and spirit of the people of New York, Charleston 
and Boston for their resolution in destroying the tea rather 
than suffer it to be landed." Captain Ayers was thoroughly 
impressed with the vigor shown by the meeting and con- 
sented to return at once to England with his cargo 
untouched. 

Many persons in the city did not approve the action of the 
town meeting, and some approved still less the measures 
taken at Boston, although the Philadelphia gathering had 
applauded them. It was therefore an interesting question 
what attitude Philadelphia would take when she heard of the 
punishment received by the New England city in the form of 
the Boston Port Bill. Should Massachusetts be supported 

this case he would lose all trade advantages and might suffer personal injuries. He 
therefore sought to moderate the current of popular feeling, and several times in 
his letters to his brother or to friends in England, who were surprised at his serv- 
ing on city and county committees, he declared that he accepted such positions 
only to prevent too violent action [See the Wharton Letters in the Library of 
the Historical Society of Pennsylvania]. 

1 The meeting was held December 27. See the account of it in the Gazette of 
December 29. 



1 60 The Rcvolutio7iary Movemetit in Painsylva7iia. 

even if such support involved the use of force ? ' The first 
notice of England's action came in May. The Assembly, on 
January 22, had adjourned until September, so that nothing 
could be expected from that body, but the people had become 
so accustomed to express their sentiments by town meeting 
that the absence of the Legislature caused no great inconven- 
ience. A meeting of the citizens was called for the evening 
of May 20, at the City Tavern. According to Watson,^ 
" some leading men of closer and steadier observation entered 
into a concerted scheme to produce a great political change," 
and called the meeting that the leadership of Philadelphia 
and Pennsylvania might be recognized. " These men were 
the Hon. Charles Thomson, John Dickinson, Esq., Governor 
J. Reed and General Thomas Mifflin." William B. Reed, in 
his life of Joseph Reed, gives a somewhat different account.^ 
On the receipt of the Boston circular, which showed how 
essential it was that immediate action be taken to support that 
city, " Reed and Mifflin, who alone appeared to have 
received private advices, together with Charles Thomson, who 
had for many years occupied a conspicuous rank among 
colonial politicians, conferred immediately as to the proper 
course to be pursued, and determined on calling, on the 
evening of the same day, Friday, May 20, 1774, a meeting of 
the citizens in the long room of the City Tavern." On 
coming to this conclusion they went out to see Dickinson 
" with the view to ascertain what his decision was, and, in case 
of any reluctance, to endeavor to remove it. They remained 

' On January 31 Thomas Wharton wrote to a friend in London : " I cannot help 
being desirous to know how Dr. F. [Franklin] will stand his ground and support 
the measure of the Bostonians, as I presume the ministry can never suffer him to 
justify, and he with his son to hold two such lucrative offices under the crown ; 
and if he does not justify the measure it may lose him his agency. If some affairs 
happen, which I think there is a probability of, I doubt his again being appointed 
for this province" [Wharton Letters]. 

2 Annals, II, 325. 

'1,65. 



The Law and the Constitution. i6i 

with Mr. Dickinson during the greater part of the day, and 
having concerted with him a plan of operations, returned to 
the city and repaired immediately to the place of meeting, 
where they were soon joined by their other friends." From 
this account it would seem that Dickinson was not a leader 
in the movement for a town meeting, but was induced by 
some effort to support a scheme which he had not originated. 

The most detailed narration of the meeting and the arrange- 
ments leading up to it is found in a letter of Charles Thom- 
son to Drayton. This statement continues Reed's account 
after the meeting with Dickinson and gives the latter a more 
prominent part. His narrative is substantially as follows •} 
When the news of the Boston Port Bill arrived in Philadelphia, 
Dickinson, who appears to have been held in reserve for this 
emergency and his friend [Thomson ?] who had taken an 
active part in the tea controversy, secretly concerte'd between 
them the measures necessary to be taken. To prepare the 
people for action, Dickinson undertook to address the public 
in a series of letters. This agreement was reached on May 
19, 1774. The next day came the letters from Boston asking 
for the support of Philadelphia, and "it was judged proper to 
call a meeting of the principal inhabitants to communicate to 
them the contents of the letter and gain their concurrence in 
the measures that were necessary to be taken." In order to 
preserve the unity of the colony in spite of the apparent oppo- 
sition of the Quakers to anything approaching extreme meas- 
ures, it was considered essential that Dickinson, in whom 
both sides had confidence, should be used. To accomplish 
this, Thomson, Reed and Mifflin dined with Dickinson on the 
day of the meeting and the latter finally agreed to the scheme 
" provided matters were so conducted that he might be allowed 
to propose and carry moderate measures." 

The fact seems to be that Dickinson not only was unwilling 

^See Stille: John Dickinson, Appendix II. 
II 



1 62 TJie Revolutionary Movement in Pemtsylvania. 

that violent measures should be proposed, but also disliked to 
acquiesce in measures which he had had no part in framing, 
lest he lose his influence with the moderates. Thus Thomson 
continues : " T [Thomson] who was on the watch, and who 
thought he saw some reluctance in one of the gentlemen to be 
brought to act a second part, prevented a farther explanation 
by proposing that R [Reed] should open the meeting, M 
[Mifflin] second him, that T. should then speak, and after him 
D. [Dickinson]." This having been arranged the conference 
was dissolved, Thomson promising Reed and Mifflin that he 
would not come to the meeting without Dickinson. The 
account then continues : "At the meeting the letter from 
Boston was read, R. addressed the assembly, with tem- 
per, moderation but in pathetic terms. M. spoke next and 
with more warmth and fire. T. succeeded and pressed for an 
immediate declaration in favour of Boston and making common 
cause with her. . . . Great clamour was raised against 
the violence of the measures proposed. D. then addressed 
the company." After his address the clamor increased and 
Thomson moved that an answer to the Boston letter be framed 
and returned by a committee appointed by the meeting. Both 
parties handed a committee Hst to the chairman and the fight 
between the two factions was renewed. "At length it was 
proposed that both lists should be considered as one and com- 
pose the committee," and this compromise was agreed to. 

There are various other accounts of the meeting. Watson, 
obtaining his information from the papers of Charles Thom- 
son, says that " Dickinson, who had the confidence of the 
Friends, took moderate grounds ; but Mr. Thomson was so 
vehement and zealous for making a common cause with Boston 
that he fainted and was carried out." Reed, in his narrative, 
speaks of the meeting as " large but as composed of the most 
heterogeneous materials. The proprietary party had sent its 
representatives ; many of the leading men among the Friends 



TJic Law and the Constitution, 163 

and the sons of nearly all the officers of the government were 
present, and all awaited with great apparent excitement, the 
opening of the meeting. After the Boston letter was read Mr. 
Reed addressed the meeting at some length and urged the 
adoption of the most spirited measures. ... -He was fol- 
lowed by Thomson and Mifflin and all urged an immediate 
and explicit declaration in favor of Boston. The proposition 
thus made revived the excitement which prevailed in the early 
part of the evening, and it was with difficulty that order and 
decorum could be so far preserved as to give Mr. Dickinson 
an opportunity of being heard. He at last succeeded and 
spoke for some time in favor of a less violent expression of 
feeling, recommending a petition to the Governor for a meet- 
ing of the Assembly. After he had finished he left the meet- 
ing ; and on the suggestion of Mr. Thomson resolutions were 
adopted recommending the appointment of a committee to 
answer the circular from Boston." Edward Til ghman says •} 
" In regard to the meeting at the City Tavern, Mr. Reed, 
a rising lawyer who came among us from New Jersey,, 
made a motion to address the Governor to call the Assembly 
that we might show our inclination to take every legal step in 
order to obtain redress of our grievances. He was seconded 
by Mr. Dickinson. It is agreed on all hands that he spoke 
with great coolness, calmness, moderation and good sense. 
Charles Thomson, as well as Reed, was more violent. He 
spoke till he fainted and then went at it again. They were 
opposed by Alexander Wilcocks and by Dr. Smith, but upon a 
division the motion was carried by a vast majority. The sense 
of the people is evidently in favor of the measure." 

From these accounts it appears that a large party in Philadel- 
phia, assembled in mass meeting, had no hesitancy in acting 
as the representatives of the colony, although without the 
slightest legal right. It was with difficulty that the gather- 

• Stills : Dickinson, p. 107. 



164 The Revolutionary Movement m Pe?i7tsylvania. 

ing was persuaded to call for the legal assemblage of the 
provincial legislature, but it adopted resolutions which author- 
ized its own committee to call a general convention of the 
inhabitants of the colony whenever such an assemblage should 
be considered expedient. The Gazette ^ after giving the 
names of the committee of correspondence appointed by 
this mass meeting of the twentieth, printed the following 
resolutions among those adopted by that gathering : ** That 
the Committee be instructed to apply to the Governor to call 
the Assembly of the Province," and " That they be authorized 
to call a meeting of the Inhabitants when necessary." The 
same paper then gave the letter sent to Boston, and added that 
its sentiments were approved by every member of the com- 
mittee. Thus the scheme of action proposed by Reed, 
Mifflin and Thomson was carried out and a majority of at 
least "two or three hundred respectable inhabitants of the 
City of Philadelphia" left the control of affairs in their prov- 
ince in the hands of a committee responsible only to " a more 
general meeting of the inhabitants." This in itself was a 
victory of the popular party over the Quakers, who, as Thom- 
son remarked, " had an aversion to town meetings and always 
opposed them." 

The resolutions framed by the Philadelphia committee and 
forwarded to Boston have been considered as very weak 
because they hint that it might be best to pay for the tea 
destroyed in that city. John Adams remarked that the letter 
was coldly received, but his cousin saw more clearly the 
significance of the section relating to payment and of the 
whole movement which resulted in popular action in the 
Quaker colony.^ In the proposition from Pennsylvania, 

1 May 25, June 8. 

2 It seems to have been a point that was debated at some length whether or not 
this suggestion of payment should be made in the Boston letter. Some thought 
that Boston ought to pay for the tea, but others saw little difference between the 
action of the New Englanders and that of their own people. There was a finan- 



The Lazv and the Constitution. 165 

Samuel Adams saw a true presentation of the rights of the 
case. The property destroyed was that of a private company 
and not of the British government. Massachusetts indeed 
could refuse to purchase any tea but no theory of colonial 
rights gave her any power over property not yet landed upon 
her shores. But the sentiment expressed by the Philadel- 
phia letter was a secondary point in the estimation of Adams. 
He placed the emphasis on the fact that the people of Penn- 
sylvania, assembled in general meeting, had spoken without 
waiting for their legislature to act. Here was an expression 
of the sovereignty of the people which meant a great deal for 
the future. It was the triumph of the principle of democracy 
in a State thus far controlled by aristocracy , and Adams saw 
the meaning of the change and rejoiced at it. The Whig 
leaders in Pennsylvania, as Thomson remarked, "had no con- 
fidence in the members of the Assembly, who were known to 
be under the influence of Galloway and his party, and they 
had another object in view. When the merchants led the 
people into an opposition to the importation of the East India 
Company's tea those who considered that matter only as a 
manoeuvre of the ministry to revive the disputes between 
Great Britain and America and who were firmly persuaded 
that these disputes would terminate in blood, immediately 
adopted measures to bring the whole body of the people into 
the dispute and thereby put it out of the power of the mer- 
chants, as they had done before, to drop the opposition when 
interest dictated the measure. They, therefore, got commit- 
tees established in every county throughout the province." 

cial loss to the East India Company in either case. The final message seems to 
have been a compromise. If payment meant independence of Parliamentary 
interference for the future, then Philadelphia favored payment, but if not, then 
general colonial action should be taken. As one writer expressed the matter, 
payment for the tea should be the last act in reconciliation [See the letters of 
Wliarton and the Philadelphia papers. The opinion of Samuel Adams on the 
proceedings at Philadelphia is in Wells' Life of Samuel Adams, II, 172]. 



1 66 TJic Revolutionary Movement in PcJinsylvajiia. 

Of this more radical sentiment represented in Pennsylvania 
by Thomson, Reed and Mifflin, the Boston democrats were 
aware and they saw it assume the leadership in the Quaker 
colony with much satisfaction. It was no small matter when 
a town meeting controlled the policy of a colony. It was of 
still greater importance that a political organization composed 
of county committees throughout the colony should be in a 
position to dictate to the legal Assembly of Pennsylvania and 
that Dickinson, the apostle of legality, should concur in these 
measures. Such methods were no less revolutionary because 
the advocates of constitutional resistance considered them 
wise and the precedent thus furnished was used with great 
advantage a little later. Yet farther the various factions in 
Pennsylvania were being compelled to take a definite position 
on the questions at issue and this was no slight advantage to 
the revolutionary forces. 

The results soon proved the wisdom of Samuel Adams' 
opinion. Meetings were held at which it was determined to 
show the sympathy for Boston by closing all places of busi- 
ness on June i, when the Port Bill went into effect, and it was 
at once assumed that the invitation of the New York Com- 
mittee of Correspondence for a Colonial Congress would be 
accepted. The delay which had accompanied action by the 
Assembly in the past had aroused suspicion of that body and, 
as Ettwein said: "Where the leaders saw no hope of accom- 
plishing their plans in the General Assemblies they called 
together Provincial Conventions." The town meeting had in 
fact guaranteed that Pennsylvania would act in harmony with 
the other colonies. The machinery of an extra-legal govern- 
ment had been established and measures had been taken which 
would make clear the attitude of all parties in the State. 
The power of the conservatives rested upon the constitution 
and the legal assembly, but the law and the constitution had 
been subordinated to pressing necessity. Time alone could 
tell what might be the outcome of the new movement. 



CHAPTER X. 
The Alignment of Parties. 



Authorities. 

The following are the main authorities for this chapter : 

Maryland Archives, Vols. XI and XII. 

Proceedings of the Convention of the Province of Maryland, 1774-76 ; Annap- 
olis, 1774-75-76; reprinted, Baltimore, 1836. 

The Maryland Gazette. 

Hanson, A. C. Laws of Maryland made since 1763. Annapolis, 1787. 

Purviance, Robert. Narrative of Events which Occurred in Baltimore Town 
during the Revolutionary War. Baltimore, 1849. [Especially the Appendix.] 

Journals of the House of Representatives of Pennsylvania, 1776-81, i vol., 
Michael Hillegas, Editor. 

Proceedings Relative to the Conventions of 1776 and 1790, Philadelphia, 1825. 

Acts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, l777-8l- 
Appendix, 1775-76- 

Proud, Robert. History of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, 1797-98. 

Sharpless, Isaac. History of Quaker Government in Pennsylvania. [Especially 
Vol. II, The Quakers in the Revolution.] 

Reed, William B. Life of Joseph Reed. 

Dickinson, John. Vindication. [Stille : Life of John Dickinson, Appendix 5.] 

Proceedings of the Loyalist Commissioners. [Especially the Wilmot Series. 

Vol. II.] 

The Wharton Manuscripts in the Library of the Historical Society of Pennsyl- 
vania. 

Force, Peter. Printed Archives and Unpublished Papers in the Library of Con- 
gress. 
Use has been made also of the press and pamphlet literature of the time to 

which reference has been given, as well as to such volumes as Eddis : Letters 

from America. 

During the decade preceding the passage of the Boston 
Port Bill the colony of Pennsylvania had seemed to be 
united in its opposition to Great Britain. Deference to the 
wishes of the moderate leaders had prevented any open break 
between the radical and conservative parties, but the resolu- 
tions of sympathy with New England and the power shown 

(167) 



1 68 Tlic Revolutionary Movcmcjit m Pc7i7isylvania. 

by the Philadelphia town meeting soon produced a change. 
Opinions varied as to the proper colonial attitude, and it was 
not long before each party announced its position. 

On June i, 1774, the Gazette published the following protest: 
" Observing in the Pennsylvania Packet of this day a notifica- 
tion ' that a number of Persons composed of the Members 
of all Societies in this city, met and unanimously agreed 
that it would be proper to express their Sympathy for their 
Brethren in Boston by Suspending all Business on the first 
day of the next Month' , . . the people called Quakers, 
tho' tenderly sympathizing with the Distressed, and justly 
sensible of the value of our Religious and Civil Rights, and 
that it is our duty to exert them in a Christian spirit, yet in 
order to obviate any Misapprehensions which may arise con- 
cerning us, think it necessary to declare that no Person or 
Persons were authorized to represent us on this occasion and 
if any of our community have countenanced or encouraged 
this Proposal they have manifested great Inattention to our 
religious Principles and Profession, and acted Contrary to the 
Rules of Christian Discipline established for the preservation 
of order and Good Government among us. Signed on behalf 
and at the Desire of the Elders and Overseers of the Several 
Meetings of our Religious Society in Philadelphia and other 
Friends met on this Occasion the 30th of the 5th month 
1774. John Reynell, James Pemberton, Samuel Noble." 

This resolution expressed the attitude of the extremely 
conservative section of the colony, but it by no means indi- 
cated the general sentiment of the city. For the time being 
the moderates and the radicals were heartily united. On June 
I, the date of the execution of the Port Bill, shops were 
closed in Philadelphia, church bells were tolled and the Pres- 
byterians showed sympathy with their Puritan fellows by lis- 
tening to a sermon from the text : " And in every province 
whithersoever the King's commandment and decree came. 



The Alignuicnt of Parties. 1 69 

there was great mourning." On June 9 the mechanics repre- 
senting the radical party appointed a committee of eleven " to 
co-operate with the Merchant Committee " in determining the 
policy of the city. Here indeed was a step toward the con- 
trol of Philadelphia by mass meeting, and on the next day 
the same method was carried farther. A meeting " of inhab- 
itants called in from all Societies in town " was held to deter- 
mine what course of action should be recommended to the 
people at the town meeting of June 18. Organization was 
requisite to success, and extra legal organizations were rapidly 
assuming the same place in Philadelphia as in Massachusetts 
or Maryland. On June 8 the governor had been asked to 
summon the Assembly. On his refusal the meeting of the 
eighteenth, taking into consideration the recommendations of 
the smaller gathering of the tenth, advised the Assembly to 
meet of its own will and urged the assembling of a Continental 
Congress.^ 

Meanwhile the intimate relations which existed between the 
colonies of Pennsylvania and Maryland were leading many 
men in the northern province to look toward Baltimore for 
guidance in political methods. Economic interests had bound 
Maryland and the Susquehanna Valley together for a long 
time, and a comparison of the meetings held and resolutions 
adopted in the two colonies during the period of excitement 
caused by the troubles regarding the importation of tea, 
shows that this union was more than a merely business rela- 
tionship. In 1 77 1 the Legislature of Maryland had adopted 
resolutions declaring that the colony could not be treated by 
the British government as a conquered province, for the 
inhabitants came to America under Crown encouragement to 
increase Crown dominions, and the rights which they had 

iSee the Gazette of June 15, where the petition to the governor " signed by 
near nine hundred freeholders" is given; also the remarks in the issue of 
June 22. 



I/O The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

brought with them had never been lost/ On April 19, 1774, 
the Legislature was prorogued, and never met again under 
proprietary government. " From this period," remarks 
Hanson in his Collection of the Laws of Maryland, " there 
was no real authority except that derived immediately from 
the people." Whether or not Maryland influenced Pennsyl- 
vania in the matter of the Boston troubles, the two States 
took similar action. Kent County on May 18 had protested 
against the importation of tea, and on the twenty-fifth the 
people of Annapolis elected a Committee of Correspondence 
which, in union with like committees from other counties, 
should form a general provincial committee. This meeting 
also demanded the repeal of the Boston Port Bill, advocated 
an association to support a non-importation agreement, and 
even went so far as to urge lawyers to refuse to bring suit 
against any Marylander for debts due an Englishman, all of 
which resolutions were reaffirmed by a second meeting on 
May 27. Nor did the people rely on outside opinion to 
support this radical measure. With that spirit of self-suffi- 
ciency, which was a marked trait in Maryland political life, 
they resolved that all intercourse should be suspended with 
any colony which would not join in these measures.^ 

This action was followed by meetings in Talbot County, 
May 30 ; Kent, June 2 ; Anne Arundel, June 4 ; Frederick, 
June 8 and 11, and Charles on June 14.^ On June 22, three 
weeks before the county convention at Philadelphia (July 15), 
delegates from the several Maryland counties met in conven- 
tion at Annapolis and in reality assumed control of the colony. 
Governor Eden had left the province on May 28 and did not 
return until November. Meanwhile the extra-legal conven- 
tion was unhampered in its authority and was certainly no 

' Proceedings, October 9, 1771. 

2 Maryland Gazette, June 2. 

3 See accounts of these meetings in the Maryland Gazette, June 2, 9, 16, etc. 



The Alignmnit of Parties. 1 7 1 

restraining influence upon the corresponding body at Phila- 
delphia/ In the southern colony there was much the same 
jealousy between the eastern and western shores as between 
Quakers and Presbyterians in Pennsylvania, but the Maryland 
convention harmonized the opposing forces. Votes were 
taken by counties, and instead of attempting to revive the old 
legislature, which had conducted previous contentions with 
the governor, a new political organization was formed resting 
on the basis of popular sovereignty. Throughout the move- 
ment in Maryland, care was taken that all sections of the 
■colony should be consulted, and this fact explains why no 
such division occurred as in Pennsylvania. When, for exam- 
ple, the second convention, elected and held in accord with 
Congressional advice, met on November 21, no important 
business was undertaken until all counties of the State were 
represented,^ and this precedent appealed with great force to 
the counties of Pennsylvania which had repeatedly seen their 
protests disregarded. Governor Eden's popularity prevented 
the rancorous hostility against England which prevailed in 
colonies like Massachusetts and Virginia, and the equitable 
action of the legislature prevented Maryland from undergoing 
the internal rebellion through which her northern neighbor 
passed. Colonial conditions tended to soothe rather than 
irritate the international dispute. 

Of the early revolutionary period, Governor Eden, in his 
letter to Lord Dartmouth, wrote •? " The province has been 
tolerably quiet since I arrived,"^ but " before that, they had in 
one or two instances been second in violent measures to Bos- 
ton." One such instance had been the burning of the " Peggy 
Stewart " because she had brought over a cargo of tea — an 

1 See the Proceedings of the Conventions of the Province of Maryland, p. 3 
and following. 

' Proceedings, p. 6. 

3 Force : American Archives, IV, I, 1075. 

* November and December, I774- 



172 TJic Rcvoliitio7iary Movcvicnt in Pennsylvania. 

act which could hardly be considered "second" to anything 
which even Boston had done. The personal popularity of 
Eden prevented further outbreaks, but, as he continued in the 
letter quoted, "The spirit of resistance against the tea act, or 
any mode of internal taxation is as strong and universal here 
as ever. I firmly believe that they will undergo any hardship 
sooner than acknowledge a right in the British Parliament in 
that particular, and will persevere in their non-importation and 
non-exportation experiments in spite of every inconvenience 
they must consequently be exposed to, and the total ruin of 
their trade." This was in sharp contrast to the policy which 
their previous action had led Pennsylvanians to expect of the 
merchants of Philadelphia. In November the second conven- 
tion in Maryland resolved that the militia should be organized 
and drilled, that arms and ammunition should be purchased, 
and non-importation maintained, thus taking the sovereign 
powers of the State into its own hands. ^ 

Pennsylvania soon followed her southern neighbor. At 
the meeting of June 10, 1774, it was resolved by the people 
assembled that the act closing the port of Boston was uncon- 
stitutional, and that it was expedient to convene a Continental 
Congress." Instead of making recommendations to the pro- 
vincial assembly gathered on its own motion, or by call of the 
governor, this town meeting decided : " That a large and 

' Proceedings, p. 6 and following. 

* It was of this meeting that Wharton wrote on June 10 : "A general meeting 
is to be held in this city when it is not doubted that the greatest numbers will 
attend that was ever known on any occasion. A body of about forty persons were 
together yesterday to propose the resolves for this general meeting " [Wharton 
Manuscript. See also the account of the meeting in the Gazette, June 22, 1774]. 
Dickinson's acceptance of the chairmanship of a body which had little hesitancy 
in over-riding the legal authorities of the colony must be considered as an evidence 
of an increasing radical sentiment. He not only presided at the town meeting, 
but consented to act as chairman of the committee appointed by that body to con- 
trol the province. It was an action which in the later months he found it diffi- 
cult to explain. 



The Aligjimcnt of Parties. 173 

respectable committee (43 members) be immediately appointed 
for the city and county of Philadelphia to correspond with 
the sister colonies and with the several counties in this prov- 
ince in order that all may unite in promoting and endeavouring 
to attain the great and valuable ends mentioned. 
That the committee nominated by this meeting shall consult 
together and on mature deliberation, determine what is the 
most proper mode of collecting the sense of this province and 
the appointing Deputies for the same to attend a general 
Congress ; and having determined thereupon shall take such 
measures as by them shall be judged most expedient for pro- 
curing this province to be represented at the said Congress in 
the best manner that can be devised for promoting the pubHc 
welfare." Here was a second popular assemblage creating, 
in an entirely extra-legal manner, an authority which, with no 
warrant other than that derived from the principles of popular 
sovereignty, was to control and speak for the colony. 

On June 27,^ the committee thus appointed met in Carpen- 
ters' Hall, drew up a circular and sent it to all the counties 
of the province requesting their acquiescense in the following 
resolutions •? 

1. "That the speaker of the Hon. House of Representa- 
tives be desired to write to the several members of Assembly 
in this province requesting them to meet in this city as soon as 
possible, but not later than the first of August next, to take 
into consideration our very alarming situation." 

2. " That letters be written to proper persons in each 
county recommending it to them to get coininittees appoiiited 
for their respective counties, and that the said committee or 
such number of them as may be thought proper, may meet in 
Philadelphia, at the time the Representatives are convened 
in order to consult and advise on the most expedient mode of 

1 See Gazette of June 22 and 29. 

2 Pennsylvania Gazette, July 6, 1774. Italics are the authors. 



1/4 1^^^ Revolutionary Movcmc7it in Pennsylvania. 

appoi7iting deputies for the general Congress, and to give their 
weight to such as may he appoiiited^ 

These letters, after saying that the speaker had already- 
consented to summon the Assembly when the governor made 
such action unnecessary by convening that body himself, con- 
tinued : " What we have therefore to request is, that if you 
approve of the mode expressed in the second proposition, the 
whole or part of the committee appointed or to be appointed 
for your county will meet the committees from the other 
counties at Philadelphia, on Friday, the fifteenth of July, in 
order to assist in framing instructions and preparing such mat- 
ters as may be proper to recommend to our Representatives 
at their meeting the Monday following." From this action it 
is clear that the legislature was not the body which the com- 
mittee intended should have control of the province, for had 
that been the case there would have been no need, in face of 
the governor's action, of a county convention at Philadelphia. 
Indeed, the resolutions themselves furnish internal evidence 
that the Assembly was not considered a perfectly representa- 
tive body, for they continued : " We trust no apology is 
necessary for the trouble we propose giving your committee 
of attending at Philadelphia as we are persuaded you are fully 
convinced of the necessity of the closest union among our- 
selves both in sentiment and action ; nor can such union be 
obtained so well by any other method as by a meeting of the 
county committees of each particular province in one place pre- 
paratory to the general Congress." What was intended was the 
creation of an authority in the colony which should adequately 
represent all races and sections and could therefore speak 
with overwhelming force to the Assembly. If the legislature 
would not act, the leaders of the convention were to proceed on 
their own initiative. To promote colonial unity the leaders 

of the revolutionary movement, " D , M and T , 

after the meeting of the Inhabitants of Philadelphia and the 



The Alignment of Parties. 175 

resolutions passed at the State House, under color of an 
excursion of pleasure made a tour through two or three fron- 
tier counties in order to discover the sentiments of the inhabi- 
tants and more particularly of the Germans " ^ 

The last resolution in the message sent by the Philadelphia 
committee to the various counties is also significant. " We 
would not offer such an affront to the well known spirit of 
Pennsylvania as to question your zeal on the present occasion. 
Our very existence in the rank of Freemen and the security 
of all that ought to be dear to us, evidently depend on our 
conducting this great cause to its proper issue by firmness, 
wisdom and unanimity. We cannot therefore doubt your 
ready concurrence in every measure that may be conducive to 
the public good ; and it is with pleasure we can assure you that 
all the colonies from South Carolina to New Hampshire seem 
animated with one spirit in the common cause,, and consider 
this as the proper crisis for having otir differences zvith the mother 
country brought to some certain issue and our liberties fixed upon 
a permanent foundation. This desirable end can only be 
accomplished by a free communion of sentiments and a sin- 
cere, fervent regard to the interests of our common country." 
In the light of this resolution, the trip of the Philadelphia 
leaders throughout the frontier counties where radical senti- 
ment was most pronounced, and the frequent meetings which 
the revolutionary committee was holding in the city^ during 
the interval between its appointment and the gathering of the 
convention, there was little wonder that the conservatives in 
the city expected that the voice of Pennsylvania in the coming 
Continental Congress would be a radical one. 

Early in July Thomas Wharton, the agent of the East 
India Company in Philadelphia, and in no sense an advocate 
of advanced measures, became frightened at the prospect. 

1 Thomson's statement in Still6's Dickinson. 
* Gazette, July 22 and 29. 



1/6 TJic Revolutionary Movcmait in Pennsylvania. 

He wrote to his brother Samuel (July 5), urging that it 
might be well, since the colonies were determined to unite at 
all events, that the English government allow the union and 
retain oversight of it. After speaking of the events in the 
city, Wharton continued : " Hence thou seest the probability 
of an American Union taking place ; and I dare say thou 
wilt join with me in believing it would be happy could our 
parent State assist us in thus establishing a constitutional 
Union between her and us ; she to appoint a supreme magis- 
trate to reside on the continent who, with a fixed number 
taken from each House of Assembly, should form an upper 
legislature to control the general affairs of the continent. 
The intention of this Congress is to endeavor to form a con- 
stitutional plan for the government of America, dutifully 
petition and remonstrate, and, if possible, to point out such 
heads that we may unite with the mother country upon a con- 
stitutional union." In a letter to Walpole, May 2, he had 
already suggested the same thing and had said : " This may 
be looked upon by our superiors at home as granting the 
colonists too much, yet I believe some such measure will be 
found necessary to be adopted." Again on May 31 he had 
written : " Nothing I know of can take place which will so 
long continue you and us as one people as the establishing 
an upper house, to consist of deputies from every Assembly 
to act in legislature with a Lord Lieutenant." Although in 
the letter of July 5 he said that "if relief should not be 
granted to the prayer of the Americans, I suppose it will 
then be considered how far a general non-exportation and 
non-importation [agreement] will be proper for the colonies to 
engage in," he added that the reason he accepted a position on 
the city committee " was a sincere desire to keep the transac- 
tions of our city within the limits of moderation and not inde- 
cent or offensive to our parent state." The resolutions 
which were finally adopted and sent out, although they were 



The Alignine7it of Parties. i yj 

radical in tone, would have been yet more so had Dickinson 
been allowed to frame them. In the words of Wharton: "J. 
Dickinson (one of the Committee) produced a number of 
resolves, some of which were expressed in terms we could 
not approve of, and therefore, after debates which lasted ten 
or twelve hours, we took off all the acrimonious parts." At 
the close of the letter in a postscript written after the news of 
the Quebec Act had been received, Wharton added the simple 
but pregnant words : " Where will matters terminate ? " It 
is easy to see from this letter that popular feeling was several 
stages in advance of the Philadelphia Committee. 

The recognition of the western element by Dickinson and 
his friends was a movement against the old order, for in that 
section of the State the democratic and anti-English sentiment 
of the city found its chief support. The frontier counties 
were much more favorable to a convention in which they were 
equitably represented than to a legislature in which they were 
not. The convention thus agreed upon met at Philadelphia 
on July 15, selected Thomas Willing as chairman, Charles 
Thomson as secretary, and proceeded to consider the busi- 
ness which had been mapped out for it. Dickinson, as chair- 
man of the Committee of Correspondence of Philadelphia, 
presented to the convention three papers. In the first were 
stated the claims and arguments of America ; in the second 
were the instructions for delegates to a Continental Congress, 
and the third contained Dickinson's ideas regarding the 
powers of Great Britain under the Constitution. The con- 
vention urged the Assembly to appoint delegates to a general 
Congress of the colonies resolving, in the words of Thomson 
who should know, "in case the Assembly refused, to take 
upon themselves to appoint deputies." 

Meanwhile the governor who had been several times 
requested to summon the Assembly and had refused, saw 
that he had but a choice of evils, and choosing the less, 



178 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Peiinsylvania. 

took advantage of some minor Indian disturbances to call a 
session of the legislature for July 18. On the following day 
the resolutions of the Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Vir- 
ginia Assemblies suggesting a general Colonial Congress, ^ 
were presented to the house, and on the twenty-first the Pro- 
vincial Convention presented the following unanimous reso- 
lution : " That there is an absolute necessity that a Congress 
of Deputies from the several colonies be immediately assem- 
bled to consult together and form a General Plan of Conduct 
to be observed by all the colonies, for the purposes of pro- 
curing Relief for our suffering Brethren, obtaining Redress 
of our Grievances, preventing future Dissentions, firmly estab- 
lishing our Rights and restoring Harmony between Great 
Britain and her Colonies on a constitutional Foundation." A 
committee also informed the house that the convention was em- 
ployed in finishing its resolves and drawing up its sentiments 
on the present situation of public affairs, " which, when 
compleated, would be laid before the Honourable House," 
With the presentation of the "compleated resolves" the 
Assembly on July 22 voted,^ in practically the words of 
the convention, " That there is an absolute Necessity that a 
Congress of Deputies from the several Colonies be held as 
soon as conveniently may be, to consult together upon the 
present unhappy state of the Colonies, and to form and adopt 
a Plan for the Purposes of obtaining Redress of American 
Grievances, ascertaining American Rights upon the most 
solid constitutional Principles, and for establishing that Union 
and Harmony between Great Britain and the Colonies, which 
is indispensably necessary to the Welfare and Happiness of 
both." Galloway, Rhoads, Mifflin, Humphreys, Morton, 
Ross and Biddle were appointed as delegates from Pennsyl- 
vania. In the instructions drawn up for their guidance they 

'Virginia used the words " Annual Congress." 
2 Votes, VI, 519. 



TJic Alignment of Parties. 1 79 

were " strictly charged," in accomplishing the ends above 
stated, " to avoid everything indecent or disrespectful to the 
Mother State." It is noticeable that it is reconciliation and 
harmony "upon a constitutional foundation" that the Assembly 
urged. If that could not be obtained the further direction of 
matters would fall back upon the body which set the machinery 
of a Continental Congress in motion, i. e., upon the Provincial 
Convention, or in case of its dissolution, upon the County 
Committees and the people whom they represented. The 
movement which made for a national as distinct from a colonial 
policy, in Pennsylvania at least, rested upon a popular and 
not on a legislative foundation.^ 

There is one resolution of the convention that seems to 
breathe a firmer spirit of defiance than any previous official 
utterance of Pennsylvania. It shows how thoroughly that 
body was convinced that the Continental Congress should 
have the real direction of affairs in America and its own wil- 
lingness to support that Congress in spite of any action which 
the Pennsylvania Assembly might take. It is as follows •? 

" If any proceedings of the Parliament of which notice shall 
be received on this continent before or at the general Congress 
shall render it necessary in the opinion of that Congress for 
the colonies to take farther steps [than non-importation and 
exportation] in such case the inhabitants of this province shall 
adopt such farther steps and do all in their power to carry 
them into execution." While the convention hoped that a 
reconciliation could be brought about " by which Americans 
should have all the rights here that Englishmen have there," 

1 In their note-book of the testimony given by Galloway on February 12, 1784, 
the British Loyalist Commissioners say: " It was thought better to appoint Con- 
gress from the General Assemblies than to permit it to be done by conventions, 
which they saw would be the case. . . . He agreed to go as a delegate on 
condition that he might draw his own instructions" [See Galloway's testimony 
in Proceedings of the Loyalist Commissioners ; Wilmot, II, 28-64]. 

^Journals of Convention, I, 5. 



i8o TJic Revohitmiary Movement in Pe^i^isylvmiia. 

this resolution, framed by Dickinson, seems to indicate that 
Pennsylvanians were determined to have their rights at any 
cost. 

Even more important than the action of the convention 
regarding the national Congress or the relations with England, 
was the change which its meeting had made in the local con- 
cerns of the colony. A definite organization had been formed 
within the State resting on an avowedly popular basis. It had 
approved the work of an entirely illegal organization within 
the city and had assumed the right of dictating to the legal 
representative body of the State. Whoever was dissatisfied 
with his position under the old regime turned toward the new. 
From the organization of the county committees and the meet- 
ing of the provincial conventions the old government began to 
l<Dse its prestige, and the populace — those at least who had a 
grievance — welcomed a new leadership. The Assembly was 
yet dominated by Galloway and his party. They believed 
that the only hope of America lay in the continuance of the 
union with Great Britain and in the formation of an alliance 
among themselves under her guidance. This party had no 
trust in democracy or in any system of government other 
than such oligarchies as controlled the Assembly in Pennsyl- 
vania and the Commons in England. They were unalterably 
opposed to any new organization within the State, and Gallo- 
way in particular was jealous of the influence which Dickinson 
was obtaining as the head of the convention. 

There are abundant indications that the firm attitude taken 
by the convention in its relations with the Assembly did not 
please conservatives like Wharton, who realized what this 
action meant. Thus that gentleman, in a letter of August 2 
to Walpole, said his only motive in undertaking a task (his 
committee services) "arduous and therefore disagreeable," was 
to keep his fellow citizens from proceeding to declaration and 
measures inconsistent with their duty and true interest . He 



TJic Aligiwicnt of Parties. 1 8 1 

wished a reformed administration for America under which the 
Assembly of each colony could manage its local concerns, and 
he did his utmost to prevent anything more than that. He 
therefore " could not approve of all of the resolves entered into 
nor of the instructions delivered to our members of Assembly." 
As was but natural, he considered that "the Virginians in 
their extraordinary resolves and instructions " had " proceeded 
much farther than was just or prudent," but he continued, 
" who shall say, thus far you shall proceed and no farther." 
Indeed, the force of the example set in Boston, where troops 
had been collected to oppose any violent action by General 
Gage, an action which Wharton himself had to admit was 
moderate though dangerous ; and the proceedings in Mary- 
land and Virginia were making the result in Pennsylvania 
extremely doubtful. It was possible that the, legislature 
would be replaced by the extra-legal if more truly representa- 
tive convention. 

There is a striking resemblance between the position of the 
legally elected Assembly at this time, and that of its successor 
in 1776. In 1774 it was controlled by its loyalist speaker, 
Galloway, and the radical popular leaders gathered an extra- 
legal body more equitably representing the colony to dictate 
its action ; but rather than lose its position of authority, the 
legal body yielded to the will of the revolutionary one and 
adopted the policy which the latter proposed. Two years 
later, a committee representing a second mass meeting in the 
State House yard, made certain demands upon the Assembly 
and summoned a second convention to enforce their claims. 
In this case the Assembly would not yield, and the extra- 
legal convention took the step which in 1774 was unnecessary. 
Rather than allow the convention to appoint the delegates to 
the Congress, the Assembly of 1774 agreed to select them, but 
confined the choice to their own members, thereby exclud- 
ing Dickinson and Wilson whom the convention had 



1 82 The Revolutionary Movemc7it in Pennsylvania. 

in view. This was partially remedied by the addition of 
Dickinson to the delegation in October, but Wilson was not 
elected. As was natural, this assumption of power by the 
Assembly did not please the people, although they were not 
as yet ready to proceed to extreme measures. 

The reason for the hesitancy of Pennsylvania when the 
question of a formal declaration of independence was under 
discussion two years later did not arise from any difference 
in argument between the Whig leaders of Philadelphia and 
those of New England, but from questions of expediency.^ 
Adams, Gushing and Otis as well as Dickinson wished an 
orderly government and an impartial administration, but while 
New England and South Carolina possessed well organized 

1 The reasoning of the Whig party in Pennsylvania may be seen from a study 
of the Convention of 1774. It consisted of thirty-four representatives from the 
city and county of Philadelphia, among whom were Dickinson, Thomas Willing, 
James Reed, Charles Thomson, Thomas Wharton, Thomas Mifflin, five members 
from Bucks, eight from Lancaster, eight from Chester, three from York, and two 
each from Northumberland and Westmoreland. 

After resolving that there was necessity for a Continental Congress, and that 
Pennsylvania would support a non-importing and non-exporting agreement, and 
if necessary, go farther, it made the following declaration of principles [Journals 
of House of Representatives, I, 6]: "We acknowledge the prerogatives of the 
Sovereign" (then naming certain of them), but "the prerogatives are limited, 
as a certain learned judge [Blackstone, p. 237] observes, by bounds so certain 
and notorious that it is impossible to exceed them without the consent of the 
people on the one hand, or without, on the other, a violation of that original 
contract which in all states impliedly, and in ours most expressly, subsists between 
the prince and subject. — For these prerogatives are vested in the crown for the 
support of society, and do not intrench any farther on our natural liberties than is 
expedient for the maintenance of our civil" . . . "and though we are 
strangers to the originals of most states, yet we must not imagine that what has 
been here said concerning the manner in which civil Societies are formed is an 
arbitrary fiction. For since it is certain that all civil societies had a beginning, it 
is impossible to conceive how the members of which they are composed could 
unite to live together dependent on a supreme authority without supposing the 
covenants above mentioned. ' ' In support of these principles, Burlemaqui, Grotius, 
Cicero, Puffendorf, Locke, Blackstone and other writers were quoted, and passages 
from their writings were frequently incorporated into the text. 



The Alignment of Parties. 183 

and able systems of control, there was in Pennsylvania dis- 
union, discontent and what threatened to be anarchy. The 
forces in the State were too nearly even to secure peaceful 
control to either element unless there was an outside power 
to support it. Even when the Quakers and Presbyterians 
were nominally united in the framing of petitions, it was an 
extremely difficult task to maintain harmony in the colony. 
When the question of independence was added to local dis- 
putes, the leaders in the Quaker colony knew that the internal 
conflict would break out afresh. Disunion at home was much 
dreaded by Dickinson. While, if it was necessary, he was 
ready to overrule the legal authorities, as he had shown in 
1774, he did not wish to see the colonies declared inde- 
pendent of Great Britain until there had been established 
within both state and nation central governments strong 
enough to preserve the peace. With Pennsylvania evenly 
divided between combatants and Quakers, Whigs and English 
sympathizers, he considered it impossible for her to act as 
unitedly as Massachusetts, Virginia or South Carolina. He 
would postpone independence until a firm government had 
been established in Pennsylvania or a strong national govern- 
ment throughout America. 

His view was a more national, and in the light of subse- 
quent events, possibly a wiser one than that which ultimately 
prevailed, but it was none the less revolutionary. He was 
against throwing off the sovereignty of the Crown until a 
national government in America had been organized to take 
its place. He wished a state government supported by all 
parties, but there was little difference between the action of 
the Pennsylvanian and the New Englander when considered 
solely from the legal point of view. Was it less revolutionary 
for the American colonies to first establish a federal govern- 
ment and let that government proclaim independence than for 
a congress of delegates speaking in the name of the several 



1 84 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

colonies to make that declaration ? From the point of view of 
the American States it may have been revolution against their 
authority for the Continental Congress to assume the power 
of speaking for them, but so far as the relations with England 
were concerned no essential condition was altered. Indeed, is 
it not more plausible to argue that the real revolution occurred 
when an extra-legal body forced upon the constitutional gov- 
ernment of Pennsylvania a policy which it did not approve ? 

In his "Vindication," published in the Freeman's Journal, 
January i, 1783,^ Dickinson specifically denies his opposition 
to American independence. " That I opposed the declaration 
of independence in Congress I deny, but I confess that I 
opposed the making the declaration of independence at the 
time when it was made. The rigJit and authority of Congress 
to make it, the justice of making it, I acknowledged. The 
policy of then making it, I disputed. . . . To me it 
seemed that, in the nature of things, the foundation of our 
governments, and an agreement upon the terms of our con- 
federation, ought to precede the assumption of our station 
among sovereigns. . . . Mankind were naturally attached 
to plans of government that promised quiet and security under 
them. — General satisfaction with them when formed would be 
indeed a great point attained, but persons of reflection would 
perhaps think it absolutely necessary that Congress should 
institute some mode for preserving them from the misfortune 
of future discords." There appears no ground for supposing 
that Dickinson disagreed with the theory on which the declara- 
tion of independence rested nor doubted the duty of every 
American to support the declaration made by the majority, 
for within a week he was in arms against England. He 
questioned only the expedience of the act.^ 

' Still6: Dickinson, Appendix V. 

* Although Dickinson was a member of the Society of Friends, he did not 
hesitate to take up arms for his nation so soon as independence had been declared. 



The Alignment of Parties. 1 8 5 

The impetus given to popular sovereignty by the action of 
the Convention of 1774 was marked. The new Assembly 
was not as conservative as its predecessor, and for the first 
time in many years Galloway was not elected speaker. Octo- 
ber 9, on the meeting of the Assembly, it was resolved : 
" That the Freeholders and other Inhabitants qualified to elect 
members of Assembly, shall be admitted to hear the Debates 
of this House at such times and under such Regulations and 
Restrictions as the House shall think proper." ^ This vote 
seemed to give the committees of the city and counties an 
opportunity to keep better watch of the Assembly than before, 
and in case of need to more freely criticise its members. 

The committees also felt the need of a more regular position 
in the community. Although they could in no sense be re- 
garded as legal authorities in the counties, they yet tried to be 
representative bodies by recommending that at the next 
general election new committees should be chosen for the 
city and county. This advice was taken, and in November 
(i2th) sixty-seven citizens were chosen for the city and forty- 
two for the county committee. Among the former were Dick- 
inson, Mifflin, Thomson, Morris, Howell, Clymer and Reed.'' 

Other members of the Society left their companions and organized a new Quaker 
sect rather than remain at home, but Dickinson did not consider it necessary to^ 
do this. In this he was justified, for the Friends never excluded him from their 
meeting, although by taking up arms he violated one of their most fixed com- 
mandments. Possibly he was too important a man to be excluded, as were the 
commoners, for this offence. Moreover, it is a reasonable suggestion that the 
Quakers as distinct from the "Quaker party," favored America rather thau 
England in the struggle about to break out. 

President Sharpless [A History of Quaker Government in Pennsylvania, II,. 
204] estimates the number of Friends disowned for participation in the war as four 
hundred on the American side to forty on the British. Those of the denomination 
who were interested in retaining the former conditions of eastern ring rule in the 
colony were practically the only strong advocates of England's cause. 

1 Votes, VI, 550. 

2 The full list of names is in the Gazette of November i6. The card askmg 
for the election of new committees is in the Gazette of November 2. 



1 86 The Revolutionary Movement in Pen7tsylvania. 

Although this election was not favored by the more con- 
servative citizens, the City and County Committees thenceforth 
constituted the real government of the colony. Especially 
did the City Committee show its authority. Dividing itself 
into smaller sections of inspection and observation it assumed 
full charge of auctions, imports and the general conduct of 
trade. American manufacturers were fostered, American 
industry advanced and against the wishes of many, a close 
watch was kept on individuals who were supposed to be 
opposed to the American cause. ^ 

' From the time of the division into two parties on the question of the attitude 
to be taken toward England, the same hostiHty and sharp writing is seen in 
Philadelphia that was so much in evidence during the proprietary struggle. Too 
much weight should not be given to this criticism of the more radical leaders. 
A Philadelphia correspondent of Rivington's New York Gazette wrote under date 
of February 4 ; "I have been assured here that there are many of the Committee 
who could not get credit for twenty shillings, and on inquiring how the inhab- 
itants should choose such men, I was told that not one-sixth of them had voted 
at all ; that in the cities and liberties not six hundred votes had been given for 
sixty committee men, so that you see each one had only to procure the ten votes. 
A mighty easy way this, of getting into power." The list as given in the Gazette 
does not warrant the conclusion relative to the property of the men, however 
small the number of voters may have been. 

Examples of the control exercised by the committee are given in the Pennsyl- 
vania Gazette of August 31, 1774 : " Let every man be governed by the resolves 
of the city and county where he resides ; every city and county by the resolves of 
the provincial committee, and finally every province by the determination of the 
whole in a general Congress." Again, on December 14 the Gazette said : The 
Committee for Philadelphia, on December 6, " taking into consideration the 10th 
article of the Association of the General Congress, do unanimously resolve that 
the said article requires the opening of all packages of goods imported after the 
first day of December and before the first of Feb-ruary" [For articles sought see 
postscript, Pennsylvania Gazette, November 2, 1774]. AH sales are to be made 
" under the direction of the Committee." Packages of from three pounds to fif- 
teens pound in value were to be sold if they were received before February i. 
After that date the importers were offered the choice of storing, sending back, or 
selling under such terms as the committee approved all imports of forbidden 
goods. The City Committee recommended the chosen committees in every 
county, city and town to watch persons in their conduct toward this association. 
The following appeared on November 30: " To the Public." . . . "The 



The Alignment of Parties. 187 

The City Committee was always supported in its power by 
its ability to call a new provincial convention. With the 
adjournment of the Continental Congress it felt that the sense 
of the colony should be taken on the action of that body, 
and it therefore, on December 28, issued the call for a 
second convention of the people. This call was directed to 
the County Committees and read as follows : ^ "By order of 
the Committee of the City and Liberties of Philadelphia we 
have the pleasure to transmit you the following resolves passed 
this day with great unanimity : ' That this committee think it 
absolutely necessary that the Committees of the province or 
such deputies as they may appoint for this purpose be 
requested to meet together in Provincial Convention as soon 
as convenient. Resolved, that it be recommended to the 
County Committees to meet in said convention on Mon- 
day the 23d day of January next in the city' of Philadel- 
phia.' . . . From a view of the present Situation of 
public Affairs the Committee have been induced to propose 
this convention that the sense of the Province may be obtained, 
and that the measures to be taken thereupon may be the 
Result of the united Wisdom of the Colony. The obvious 
necessity of giving an immediate consideration to many mat- 
Committee having been informed that a few persons have unguardedly raised the 
price of Sundry articles of trade think it highly necessary to recommend to the 
public a due observation of the 9th article of the association of the Congress, 
viz : That such as are vendors of goods or merchandize will not take advantage 
of the scarcity of goods that may be occasioned by this association, but will sell 
the same at the rates we have been respectively accustomed to do for 12 
months last past. And if any vendor of goods or merchandize shall sell any such 
goods on higher terms, or shall in any manner or by any device whatsoever violate 
or depart from this agreement, no person ought nor will any of us deal with any 
such person, or his or her factor or agent at any time thereafter for any com- 
modity whatsoever." 

In the same number of the Gazette there is a letter urging the committees to 
take means to suppress writings which tend to prevent union among the colonies. 

1 Pennsylvania Gazette, December 28. 



1 88 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

ters of the greatest importance to the general welfare will, we 
hope sufficiently apologize to you for naming so early a date 
as the 23d of January." 

The response of the committees was hearty, and on the 
appointed day the convention gathered. Thus once more 
the new organization proved its power and accepted the 
responsibilities which its position imposed. 



CHAPTER XI. 

The Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 



Authorities. 

In addition to the authorities mentioned in Chapter X, the following list may 
be given : 

Graydon, Alexander : Memoirs of His Own Times. 

The Works of Jefferson, Galloway and John Adams ; The Diary of Christo- 
pher Marshall ; Westcott : History of Philadelphia ; Hodge : History of the 
Presbyterian Church in America, and the Statement of Jacob Ettwein, in the 
Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania. 

In the preceding pages an effort has been made to picture 
the gradual strengthening of the revolutionary movement in 
Pennsylvania. Differences of race and religion prevented 
organic unity throughout the colony, and economic necessity 
and political justice demanded that a new order should replace 
the old. In spite of such an excellent foundation for revolt, 
so great was the power of inertia, so strong was the control- 
ling political machine, that the success of the popular move- 
ment was for a long time doubtful. The rebellion against 
Great Britain was supported within the State of Pennsylvania 
by a system of county and city committees which gave the 
democrats an influence unobtainable so long as government 
by the old Assembly was maintained. By her recognition 
of the Continental Congress as the controlling body in America 
the State gave to her dissatisfied citizens an opportunity of 
gaining legal sanction for an internal revolution,^ and there 
1 The Assembly of Pennsylvania was the first colonial legislature to meet after 
the adjournment of Congress. Its action was thus doubly effective. The gov- 
ernor was surprised at its confirmation of all the Congressional measures, and 
Reed regarded this action as very significant. The latter wrote to Dartmouth 
that this vote was " expressive of the approbation of a large number of Quakers 
in the House, a body who have acted a passivg part in all the disputes between 
the mother country and the colonies." Before this he had expressed a very dif- 
ferent opinion of the Quakers [See his letter to Quincy ; Reed : Life of Reed, I, 

(189) 



IQO TJic Revolutionary Movonciit in Pennsylvania. 

speedily came into existence a system of committees legally 
responsible to no one, but in fact guided by national leaders 
and responsible to the Whig population of the colony. These 
committees were elected by the people and in turn chose 
delegates to the provincial conventions.^ So long as the regu- 
lar Assembly could be persuaded to pass such legislation as 
was desired by the radicals, there was little thought as to 
where real authority rested. The Convention of 1774 had 
merely shown itself a rival of the Assembly in its control of 
the colony, but its successor in 1775 forced an acknowledgment 
of its superior power from the old provincial legislature, even 
while it allowed nominal authority to remain with the legal 
Assembly. The year 1774 was a period of tension, during 
which the Continental Congress and the political organizations 
formed under its direction, were increasing their prestige 
throughout the nation, and the new government was com- 
pleting its organization throughout the State, The outbreak 
of hostilities in 1775 completed the transfer of power. 

The convention representing the new movement met for the 
second time in January, 1775, and was controlled by a coali- 
tion of the moderate and radical parties. This coalition not 
only dictated the position which the colony should take in 
international affairs, but it provided a means of overthrowing 

86] and this action on their part gave him much encouragement, especially as the 
Assembly had ordered their resolutions of approval to be published [Votes, VI, 
553]. "From this fountain (Cong;ress) originates the authority of the commit- 
tees . . . and I know not where such precedents may terminate," said a 
document handed around by the conservatives. 

' The Committee of Observation, Inspection and Correspondence of the city 
of Philadelphia must not be confused with the Committee of Safety. The former 
was a radical, the latter a conservative body. In general the Committees of 
Safety were organized under the direction of the provincial legislatures, the Com- 
mittees of Observation, Inspection and Correspondence (a portion of the name is 
often omitted) came from the people and had no legal basis aside from their rec- 
ognition by the continental authorities [See the Letter of a Conservative as to 
the Power Assumed by the Philadelphia Conunittee, in Force : American 
Archives, IV, 2, 238]. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 191 

the legal Assembly of the State. In the name of the colony 
of Pennsylvania it formally approved the resolutions passed 
by Congress and agreed to support the association which that 
body had recommended. If the burden of resistance to Eng- 
land should fall upon the city of Philadelphia, the western 
counties assured the convention that their active support 
could be relied upon. In order to forestall any retrograde 
movement to which the conservative Assembly might incline, 
the new government authorized the Philadelphia committee to 
assume control of the province after its own adjournment, and 
in case of need to call a new convention.^ Thus the repre- 
sentatives of radicalism put themselves at the head of the 
colony. Already the Committee of Safety, representing the 
legal Assembly, had displaced the governor in the exercise of 
executive functions. The year 1775 saw this committee in 
its turn overthrown and a body representing the, more radical 
party installed in its place. 

Threatened by the rise of this new power, the Assembly 
also took its stand in support of the Continental Congress."^ 
When the governor asked the colony to present an individual 
petition to the Crown, the Assembly by a vote of 22 to 15 
refused to disassociate its case from that of the other colonies 
or to withdraw from the Congress. It declared that " this 

1 The resolutions of the convention were published in the Pennsylvania Gazette, 
February I, 1775- 

2 The Continental Congress had met in September, 1774. One of its first acts 
was the approval of the Massachusetts resolution "that no obedience was due 
from the province to the late cruel, unjust and oppressive acts of the British Par- 
liament. ... If the same shall be attempted to be carried into execution by 
force, in such case ail America ought to support [the people of Massachusetts 
in] their opposition." Unquestionably this resolution was an act of rebellion 
[See Dartmouth's letter to the Colonial Governors. Force: American Archives, 
IV, I, 1085], yet the Assembly of Pennsylvania "unanimously approved the 
transactions of the first Congress and appointed deputies to attend another" 
[Gov. Penn to Dartmouth, Ibid. 1081]. In the words of the Governor, " there 
seemed to be everywhere too general a disposition to adhere strictly to the reso- 
lutions of the Congress. ' ' 



1 92 TJic Rcvohitio7iary Movcmc?it in Pcinisylvmiia. 

House will always pursue such measures as shall appear to 
them necessary for securing the Liberties of America." ^ 
Meanwhile the colonial populace was clamoring for action, 
but the moderate party in the Assembly would support the 
radicals in nothing but resolutions. The anti-English senti- 
ment was fostered by the insolent behavior of the naval 
officers on the Delaware, who not only robbed boats of their 
cargoes, but frequently confiscated the vessels themselves. 
The temper of the people was rapidly approaching the stage 
where deeds rather than words would be demanded, when, 
just before the meeting of the second Continental Congress, 
the flame of actual conflict burst forth. The battle of Lex- 
ington showed that war was the probable solution of the 
international problem. It necessitated a national government 
and just as certainly it necessitated a change of policy and a 
transfer of authority within the colony of Pennsylvania. 
Those who wished to retain the old order within the colony, 
as well as those who sided with England in the larger ques- 
tion, recognized that a national Congress and a state militaiy 
organization would tend to defeat their purpose. The con- 
servatives therefore not only refused to arm, but they sought 
to discredit Congressional action. It was asserted that New 
England ruled the Congress and that her aim was not only a 
national government but a national church. Pennsylvania 
had thus far tolerated all sects. The new movement, it was 
claimed, meant an alliance between New pjigland Congrega- 
tionalism and Pennsylvania Presbyterianism — a state church 
supported in their own colony by a Presbyterian convention.^ 

' The western counties and Philadelphia favored this resolution 12 103; the 
east opposed it 12 to 10, Votes, VI, 577. 

^ On January 31, 1775, Thomas Wharton wrote to his brother that a particular 
sect *' are working the several late acts of Parliament relative to Boston and 
Quebec up to a much higher pitch than the nature of the case requires, and doing 
their utmost to involve the whole continent in the same unhappy predicament as 
Boston is, not doubting when that's effected they can successfully oppose our 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 193 

To these charges there came immediate reply. " Permit 
me fellow-citizens," wrote one Whig/ " most respectfully to 
guard you, in these critical times, against paragraphs and 
extracts from public papers . . , especially those which 
may tend to infuse jealousies and suspicions of our brethren 
in the neighboring colonies, particularly at Boston." So in 
regard to Congress, " The American . . . [cause] derived 
its principal weight and dignity from the late Congress. It 
gave form and order to what would have been chaos and 
confusion if left to the provinces separately — let it once be 
thought that it wants the support and confidence of the 
people, all. its terrors vanish, and the ministry will rise like a 
giant." 

The arguments of the Whigs prevailed, and the Assembly 
did not dare take any backward step. On May 2,^ Governor 
Penn sent to the legislature the resolution of Parliament 
offering exemption from all taxes — except such as were levied 
on commerce — to those colonies whose individual legislatures 
should agree to contribute their due proportion toward the 
expenses of defence and civil government. The governor 

present state, but the thoughtful among us can not help asking what is to be the 
next step if England should be overcome ? " He continued: "Our friends . . . 
(wonder) what redress is to be expected, what civil or religious liberty enjoyed, 
should others gain the ascendancy. . . . The times are such that it won't do 
for me fully to express my sentiments. The enclosed letter will inform thee to 
what a pitch a part of the inhabitants of Maryland are got . . . especially 
those who reside to the western end, most of whom are of our particular sect." 

" I most ardently pray that the measures which our sovereign and the parlia- 
ment may pursue may be such as to restore our ancient and happy connection." 

Many of the Quakers were not so fearful of religious persecution. Among 
them were Samuel Wetherill and Christopher Marshall. A good account of the 
religious sentiment is given in Westcott: History of Philadelphia, Chapter 174, 
and there are many entertaining passages in Marshall's diary. See also Hodge: 
History of the Presbyterian Church in America, 438 and following, Wells: Life 
of Samuel Adams, H, 369, and the Wharton manuscripts. 

^ Gazette, January II. 

2 Votes, V, 583. 
13 



1 94 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

accompanied the resolution with a letter asking the Assembly 
to rescue "both counties from the dreadful calamities of a 
Civil War." The battles of Lexington and Concord, the 
attitude of the people, and the open threats of a new conven- 
tion prevented the Assembly from weakening, and on May 4 ' 
a committee of twelve, one from each county and one from 
Philadelphia, declared in a firm tone : " We cannot think the 
terms pointed out afford a just and reasonable ground for a 
final accommodation. . . . Your Honour must know that 
they (the colonies) have ever unanimously asserted it as their 
indisputable Right that all Aids from them should be their 
own free and voluntary gifts not taken by Force nor extorted 
by Fear. Under which of these Descriptions the ' Plan held 
forth and offered by the Parent to her Children ' at this Time 
with its attendant Circumstances, deserves to be classed, we 
chuse rather to submit to the Determination of your Honour's 
good Sense, than to attempt proving by the Enumeration of 
notorious Facts or the Repetition of obvious Reasons." Then 
followed the determination of the colony not to act apart from 
her sister States, the address closing with the statement that 
a subversion of the " Liberties of America " is a greater mis- 
fortune than "the calamities of a Civil War." "We should 
esteem it a dishonorable desertion of our sister colonies , . . 
to adopt a measure so extensive in consequence without the 
advice and consent of those colonies engaged with us by 
solemn ties in the same common course." - 

In the colony, at least among the radical element, this deci- 
sion was accepted as settling the question. It w^as at once 
assumed that Congress would decide to force England into a 
concession of the definite rights which the colonies had 
claimed under the Constitution. On the same day ^ a petition 

1 Votes, VI, 584. 

' See also the Pennsylvania Journal, May 10, where the action of the Assembly 
is published. » May 4, Votes, VI, 585. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 195 

" from a considerable Number of the Inhabitants of the City 
and Liberties of Philadelphia" was presented to the house 
and read, setting forth " that the Petitioners deeply affected 
with a Sense of the imminent Dangers to which this Province 
particularly, and the Colonies in general, are exposed at this 
Instant are compelled by the first Law dictated by Nature 
to endeavour to preserve themselves from utter Destruc- 
tion." . . . 

" Affairs being now reduced to Extremity by the Com- 
mencement of a Civil War on this Continent, which in all 
Probability, must in its course soon reach Pennsylvania," the 
petitioners asked for a grant of fifty thousand pounds at least 
"toward putting this Province into a State of Defense." 
This proposition excited even more opposition than the resolu- 
tions just carried. Protests were heard, but they were inef- 
fectual. Four months earlier it is doubtful if the Assembly 
would have listened to such a demand. Naturally some did 
not approve in May, but the spring of 1775 had persuaded 
many people of moderate views that it was necessary to be 
prepared for action. Fully convinced that America was 
right in her claim, they had determined that her claim 
should be supported. Other moderates reasoned in a different 
manner. It was evident to them that the colony of Pennsyl- 
vania would be forced into the revolutionary movement. 
Was it not better that the legal Assembly, controlled by the 
education and wealth of the province should guide her 
course ? ^ 

^ The ideas of a large party in the Assembly were probably better represented 
by Galloway in his "Candid Examination of the Mutual Claims of Great Britain 
and the Colonies" first printed in New York in 1775. On September 27, 1774, 
he had presented to the first Congress his scheme of union, in which he had 
above all emphasized the necessity of a strong government to unite the colonies. 
John Adams [Works, II, 388-390] gives an account of the arguments used in 
support of the plan. "We must come upon terms with Great Britain." "I 
know of no American Constitution ; a Virginia Constitution, a Pennsylvania Con- 
stitution, we have; we are totally independent of each other." . . . "Our 



1 96 The Revolutionary Movemejit in Pennsylvania. 

On April 24 the reports of the battles of Lexington and 
Concord had been received. The result was an outburst of 
indignation, which for the time placed the colony in the front 
rank of resistance. On April 25 eight thousand people had 
gathered at the State House and unanimously resolved to 
" associate together to defend with arms our property, liberty 
and lives against all attempts to deprive us of it." The Gazette 
published letters ^ from other towns, saying that parties were 
being forgotten and that union was at hand. At once 
the Committees of Correspondence took charge of militaiy 
affairs, and even clergymen began to drill their parishioners. 
The Assembly granted the money desired, and by the time 
Congress assembled on May 10 the city had a martial appear- 
ance. Franklin had become convinced two months before 
that petitions were not the true remedy for the evils under 
which the colony was suffering. As early as December he 
had told Chatham that any " unforseen quarrel between a 
drunken porter and a soldier might bring on a riot and pro- 
duce a breach impossible to be healed." ' In February he 
joined his colleagues in a letter to the Pennsylvania Assem- 
bly declaring his belief, and on March 20 left England for 
America. On May i this letter was read to the Assembly. 

legislative powers extend no further than the limit of our governments. 
There is a necessity that an American legislature should be set up, or else that 
we should give the power to parliament or King." His " Candid Examina- 
tion " again presented this plan as a true remedy for the lawless state in which 
affairs then were. "Independency," he asserted, "means ruin. If England 
refuses it, she will ruin us : if she grants it we shall ruin ourselves." (Pp. 31-32). 
In the Congress he found the cause of the anarchical spirit prevailing in the 
colony, and he urged the people to overthrow that body, petition through the 
Assembly and ask for the ancient right of participating in the tme authority of 
Parliament or of creating an Assembly for the united continent under the presi- 
dency of the King's representative. Then will order, peace and prosperity be 
again obtained. (Pp. 59-61.) 

^ April 26 and postscript of 27. 

* Works, V, 479. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 1 97 

In it the colonial agents reported that nothing was to be gained 
by further petition, for the ministry was determined first of 
all to compel obedience to the laws. The votes of Parliament 
were read, which declared that a state of rebellion already 
existed in Massachusetts, whose inhabitants " have been 
countenanced and encouraged by unlawful combinations and 
encfagfements . . .in several of the other colonies " and it 
was stated that Parliament had pledged itself to support the 
king in whatever measures he might take to put down the 
rebellion.^ 

The long-dreaded crisis seemed to be at hand. The use of 
force in defence of right had been justified, the colony had 
put its cause in the hands of a Congress, which as a last resort 
had determined to petition for redress. The news of the con- 
temptuous treatment of that petition and the announcement by 
the Crown that rebellion existed and would be Suppressed by 
force came to the colony together. The question was now 
whether Pennsylvania would remain true to her former posi- 
tion, stand by the union of the colonies and the majority of 
Congress, or retreat. Upon this question the conservatives 
and radicals, the legal and the illegal governments divided. 
" The Congress of 1774," said Jefferson to Randolph,^ "stated 
the lowest terms they thought possible to be accepted in order 
to convince the world that they were not unreasonable. . . . 
But this was before blood was spilt. I cannot affirm, but 
have reason to think these terms would not now be accepted," 
and Zubly, of Savannah, who was in Philadelphia, said the 
same in a letter to Dartmouth.^ All the evidence seems to 
show that the middle and lower classes in Pennsylvania were 
in favor of maintaining united and forcible opposition. Con- 
cerning the moderate party and the wealthier merchants, 

1 Votes, VI, 582. 

2August 25, 1775. Force : American Archives, IV, 3, 431. 

3 Force: IV, 3, 634. 



1 98 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

opinion is divided. On the one hand the opposition was said 
to be confined to the lower people who wished " to continue 
their own power in the colony."^ On the other it was stated 
that " all the wealth, virtue and understanding in the prov- 
ince," except Bucks County and certain Quakers, was on the 
side of liberty,^ A letter to London declared that "you 
would hardly conceive without seeing it, to what a height the 
political fury of this country has arrived. ... If the 
government means to do anything they must do it quickly," 
and a Maryland clergyman said " that a sure way to make 
rebels was to declare people such while innocent." ^ In quite 
a different tone a correspondent of Rivington's Gazette had 
written a little earlier (March 2): " You may be assured there 
is a most amazing change of sentiment in the people of the 
province of Pennsylvania. The Quakers, high and low 
Dutch, the Baptists and others are warmly opposed in their 
opinions to the violent and independent measures lately adopted 
and wish for others more moderate, prudent and rational." 

Affairs had reached the stage where old policies could no 
longer be pursued. War had virtually been decided upon 
and the party eager to fight was the party which had never 
considered itself fairly treated by the Assembly. Rather than 
lose the support of so large a colony as Pennsylvania, Con- 
gress and the Whigs in general would recognize the new and 
radical organization as the legal government of the province. 
Only in one way could Pennsylvania be controlled by her 
most intelligent and able citizens. Moderate men like Frank- 
lin and Dickinson, Wilson and McKean must put themselves 

1 Letter of Febniary 16. Force, IV, i, 1231. 

"^ Ibid., p. 1270. "It is impossible to describe the military ardor which now 
prevails in this city. A considerable number of the friends have joined in the 
military association. There is one company composed entirely of gentlemen 
belonging to that religious denomination " [Pennsylvania Journal, May 10, i775]- 

3 Force, IV, 3, 3 ; IV, 3, 9. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 199 

at the head of the new movement and control it from within. 
Either the old Assembly must be remodeled on popular hnes 
or a new Assembly must be established. The old leaders 
would go no farther than they were driven and their con- 
stituency regarded the new movement with horror.^ 

1 Against radical measures there came urgent protests. According to Galloway 
in a letter to New York [February 14, 1775- Pennsylvania Magazine of History, 
XXI 481], the excitement was because " we want what you fortunately have, a 
free Press ti recall the deluded people to their senses." The Quakers especially 
declared against the movement. The closing words of the testimony issued by 
the joint meeting of New Jersey and Pennsylvania said : 

<♦ We are therefore united by a sincere concern for the peace and welfare of our 
country, publicly to declare against every usurpation of power and authority, in 
opposition of. the laws and government and against all combinations, insurrections, 
conspiracies and illegal assemblies ; and as we have restrained from them by the 
conscientious discharge of our duties to Almighty God by whom Kings reign and 
Princes decree justice, we hope thro' his assistance and favor, to be enabled to 
maintain our testimony against any requisitions which may be made of us, incon- 
sistent with our religious principles, and the fidelity we owe to' the king and his 
government as by law established, earnestly deserving the restoration of that har- 
mony and concord which have heretofore united the people of these provmces 
and been attended by the divine blessing on their labors, James Pemberton, Clerk " 
[Pennsylvania Gazette, February i, 1775]- 

Marshall, in his diary for January 24, notes : '< Meetings daily amongst the 
Quakers, in order if possible, to defeat the pacific proceedings of the Contmental 
Congress, calling upon their members not to meet the county committees but 
entirely withdraw from them under the penalty of excommunications. . . . 
This day was also a paper published called a Testimony, &c., in which is con- 
tained such gross abuse against all persons that oppose their fallacious schemes, 
and stuffed with such false contradictions that it will be a lasting memento of the 
truth of what Robert Walker . . • said : the Lord is departed from you as 
he did from Saul." 

There was a portion of the denomination, however, which sought to explain 
away this declaration and to justify themselves in the support which they gave to 
the patriot cause. The testimony was aimed at riotous and indecent behavior, 
they claimed, and not against an orderly well regulated demand for their rights. 
From this movement resulted in time the so-called fighting Quakers. This 
explanation appeared originally in the Journal of February I, and was later 
reprinted in the Gazette (March 8 ) . Efforts were also made by various parties to 
belittle the Quakers' position by reprinting former speeches and writing of Friends 
in which defensive warfare was advocated as a necessity. " B. L." thus 
explains the testimony [Pennsylvania Journal, February i, 1775] =— 



200 The Revolutionary Move7nent in Pennsylvania. 

Either the moderates or the radicals must now lead, and 
above all others Dickinson could have assumed the responsi- 
bilities of leadership. Up to this time he had acted as though 
war was inevitable, and the fact that he had tried his best to 

'* Respected Friends : It is a duty incumbent on societies or individuals to 
vindicate or explain any public transaction which excites general disgust or 
uneasiness be the ground ever so slight. I have therefore preferred your paper as 
being more generally read by those calling themselves the Sons of Liberty ; in 
order to remove those suspicions and misapprehensions which a late publication 
as from the Society of Friends has produced. Those who supposed this testi- 
mony to be pointed against the measures thought necessary for the public interest 
have not attended its language or the conduct of that society since our unhappy 
dispute with the mother country commenced. A due regard to these will show 
that it is intended to preserve the general cause from being sullied by the violence 
or caprice of rash and turbulent minds. The society hath ever been distinguished 
for its loyalty to the King and its obedience to his government. This is therefore 
recommended in the strongest terms but by no means implies a loyalty to Parlia- 
ment or a Government of fellow subjects over fellow subjects, the impropriety 
and injustice of which must be apparent to the meanest capacity. A due submis- 
sion to the King and his Government most evidently means such a government as 
an English King has over English subjects ; a government bounded and limited 
by law, and founded upon the two great principles of the English Constitution 
which entitle the governed to dispose of their own property and to partake in 
legislation. This is the government for which America is contending in which 
our duty to the king and our own rights are so happily blended. 

" A due caution is also given against riots, illegal combinations and assemblies 
which by a strained and forced influence of some weak or prejudiced minds has 
been supposed to allude to the Congress, Committees, etc., bodies to which such 
terms are by no means applicable ... for the following plain reasons : 
(l) The peaceable meeting of persons and discussion of public affairs, let it be 
called by what name it will, is so far from being condemned by any law, that it 
is the best security of our happy constitution that it is lawful. (2) It cannot be 
supposed that any English subject possessing the smallest portion of virtue and 
knowledge in the English constitution would by such imputation condemn the 
three noblest assemblies who dignify the page of that history. The Barons who 
obtained Magna Charta from King John, the assembly which restored Charles II., 
and the convention at the revolution which placed King William on the throne 
were all formed on the same principles and the same necessities as 
the late American Congress. (3) The supposition would condemn the very 
meeting whose publication we are considering. It is called a meeting of repre- 
sentatives from New Jersey and Pennsylvania. By what authority did these 
representatives meet ? The discussion of political questions is no part of the dis- 
cipline or system of a religious society nor comprised within the jurisdiction of any 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 201 

prevent it, would have given him the support of the great 
middle party in the colony. August 20, 1774, he had written 
to Arthur Lee : " The insanity of Parliament has operated 
like inspiration in America. They are mad, to be sure, but 
in their phrenzy they have discovered invaluable truths. The 
Colonists know now what is designed against them. All 
classes of people are surprisingly united in sentiment . . . The 
first step . . . will be non-importation . . . the 
next . . . non-exportation." " If severities increase 
events will inevitably take place which a man so connected 
with this continent as you are must view with inexpressible 
pain of mind. The people in general throughout the country 
look forward to extremes with resolution." ^ After the 

meeting among Friends which only affect religious concerns or the economical 
affairs of the society. An extraordinary occasion produced an extraordinary 
Meeting but not an illegal one, because there is no law whieh prohibits the 
king's subjects from meeting to discuss any political question. In this case it was 
a laudable one as its intention must have been to make a timely provision against 
those irregularities and tumults which public commotions often create. (4) That 
the present Congresses and Committees were not meant appears from the conduct 
of the worthy Friend whose name is to the publication, who has been present in 
such assemblies and took an active part in the choice of the Committee last sum- 
mer which could not have had his concurrence if included under any of the 
descriptions of a riot, rout, illegal combination or assembly ; — I might add, that 
several respectable members of this society have not only served on former com- 
mittees of this kind, and acquiesced in the present measures, but have returned their 
thanks to the Committee of this City for an alteration made in disposing or storing 
their goods imported under the Association of the late Congress — Procedures 
wholly inconsistent with the idea of its being an illegal Assembly. 

"Upon the whole, it is presumed, enough has been offered to show that this 
testimony could not be intended to cast any disrespect upon the course of public 
liberty much less to create divisions and discord. Taken in its true and proper 
light it is calculated to point out those rocks of licentiousness and outrage which 
often lay concealed under the smooth surface of the fairest pretensions and have 
proven fatal to the best causes. It is indeed to be wished it could have derived 
more respect and authority from the members and weight of the representation 

. . . but the intention certainly has merit however it may be thought to fall 
short in the execution." 

^ Force: American Archives, IV, i, 726. 



202 The Rcvolntmiary Movement hi Pe7insylva7iia. 

meeting of the Congress of 1774 he seemed to think with 
Jefferson that unless the terms of the American petition were 
compHed with, war must follow. October 28 he wrote to 
Quincy : ^ " The most peaceable provinces are now animated, 
and a civil war is unavoidable unless there be a quick change 
of British measures. The usual events, no question, will take 
place if that happens — victories and defeats. But what will 
be the final consequence ? If she (England) fails, immediate 
distress, if not ruin ; if she conquers, destruction at last. . . 
Several Europeans powers will fall on her as soon as she 
is entangled with us. If they should not, what can she effect 
at three thousand miles distance against at least four hundred 
thousand freemen fighting pro aris et focis ? . . . . Oh I 
for a warning voice to arouse them to conviction of this 
important truth, that the reconciliation depends upon the 
passing moment, and that the opportunity will in a short time 
be irrevocably past as the days beyond the flood." Other 
passages in this letter show that thus far nothing had hap- 
pened in Massachusetts of which he did not approve. In 
New York he was understood to be in favor of violence in 
case the petition of Congress was not approved," and although 
no one probably desired a peaceful solution more than he, 
the battle of Lexington seems to have convinced him that 
the popular current had set too strongly against England for 
peace to be maintained. 

The following letter from New York dated March 23, 1775, 
gives the Tory view of Dickinson's position: 

^" In your Farmer's letters . . . you positively pronounce 
that the King is the ruling power in whom is justly vested 
the regulations of trade, etc. ... I perfectly remember 
your asserting the dependence of the Colonies on Great Britain 

^ Force, IV, i, 947. 

2 See the letter to the Philadelphia Committee, in Force, IV, 2, 238. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organizatiott. 203 

in the most positive terms, and you have now set your seal ^ 
to a resolution of taking up arms against your sovereign 
unless King, Lords and Commons relinquish their claim to 
the very privileges which, seven years ago, you spent whole 
pages in defending their right to. , . . What ! deliver a 
petition to the greatest Monarch on Earth with one hand and 
hold a sword in the other, with a paper on the point of it, 
containing the following words : ' if you do not give up your 
legal authority over the Colonies, we will break off all con- 
nection with you and by withholding certain articles we will 
drive Great Britain, Ireland and the West Indies into such 
convulsions as will shake your throne, and enable us to com- 
mand our own terms.' ... I am at a loss what name to 
give your boasted intentions of wounding the commercial 
interest of Great Britain. If you really mean what you say 
it is the greatest infatuation. The island of Teneriffe might 
with as great a prospect of success threaten to ruin Willing 
and Morris by not trading with them, when every other 
corner of the habitable globe pants for their correspondence." 
The letter declared that war must come unless the colonies 
abandoned their position and pictured the results. It urged 
Dickinson to come over to the English side, saying that his 
influence would turn all the lower order of men in Pennsyl- 
vania who were his bigoted followers, and would prevent 
that declaration of independence which was the popular 
desire. After maintaining the impossibility of successful resist- 
ance, an appeal to sentiment is made. " Is it possible. Sir, 
that a man of your penetration should expect or wish that 
Great Britain should be bullied into abject submission." ^ 

In spite of such appeals Dickinson seems to have continued 
in his former conviction that war was the only logical out- 
come. April 29 he wrote to Lee : 

1 By the Resolutions of Convention January, 1775. 
* Force, IV, 2, 212. 



204 TJie Rcvohitionary Movcineiit in Pennsylvania. 

" What topics of reconciliation are now left for men who 
think as I do, to address our countr>^men ? . . . Have we 
the slightest reason to hope that those ministers and represen- 
tatives (in Parliament) will not be supported throughout the 
tragedy as they have been through the first act? No. 

We are a united resolved people are, or quickly shall be 
well armed and disciplined. . . , Our towns may be 
destroyed, but they will grow again. We compare them 
not with our rights and liberties. We worship as our fathers 
worshipped, not idols which our hands have made."^ 

With the meeting of Congress in May, Dickinson, uncertain 
as to the results of separation, and eager to prevent such an 
occurrence, made another effort for peace. By his personal 
popularity and his argument that the refusal of a second 
petition would unite all America, he finally succeeded in 
carrying his proposition for a new petition to the Crown, The 
petition was humble in its tone, and was very much of an 
anti-climax to the position which its author had previously 
taken. In a letter to Arthur Lee, written July 7, 1775, Dick- 
inson explained the reasons for this attitude. "You will 
perhaps at first be surprised that we make no claim and 
mention no right. But I hope, on considering all circum- 
stances, you will be of opinion that this humility ... is 
at present proper. Our rights have been already stated, our 
claims made. War is actually begun, and we are carrying it 
on vigorously. This conduct . . . will show that our 
spirits are not lowered. The opportunity is now offered by 
an unexceptional petition [to stop the conflict.] If they reject 
this application with contempt, the more humble it is, the more 
such treatment will confirm the minds of our countrymen to 
endure all the misfortunes that may attend the contest." ^ 

There can be no doubt that this attitude of caution assumed 

1 Force, IV, 2, 443. 

2 Force, IV, 2, 1604. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 205 

by the moderates, and which is best represented by Dickin- 
son's position, was extremely distasteful to the more active 
party in Congress and in the colony itself. Men of as dif- 
ferent temperaments as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson 
resented it, yet they both admitted the ability of the party's 
representative. When Jefferson presented his declaration in 
1775, it was too strong for the Pennsylvanian. "He still 
retained the hope of reconciliation with the mother country. 
. . . He was so honest — and so able — that he was greatly 
indulged by those who did not feel his scruples." Congress 
permitted him " to draw up the second petition to the King 
according to his own ideas." ^ Jefferson's views were evi- 
dently not expressed by the petition, for he remarked in 
regard to the attitude in which the Americans were placed : 

" The disgust against this humility was general, and Mr. 
Dickinson's delight at its passage was the only tircumstance 
which reconciled (the delegates) to it." "The author of the 
petition said that the only word in it which dissatisfied him 
was ' Congress,' at which B. Harrison answered that was the 
only word he liked in the whole declaration." ^ Adams was 
harsher. In a letter to James Warren of August 17, which 
was intercepted and published in the papers, he said : 

"A certain great Fortune and pidling Genius whose Fame 
hath been trumped so loudly, has given a silly Cast to our 
whole Doings. We are between Hawk and Buzzard. We 
ought to have had in our Hands a Month ago, the whole 
Legislative, Executive and Judicial Power upon the Continent, 
and to have completely modelled a Constitution, have raised 
a Naval Power and opened all our Ports wide, to have arrested 
every Friend to Government upon the Continent and held them 
as hostages for the poor Victims in Boston and then opened 
the door as wide as possible for peace and reconciliation." 

1 Jefferson Works, I, ii. 

* See Jefferson's account in his Autobiography. 



2o6 The Revohitionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

In Pennsylvania the radicals agreed with Adams and Jeffer- 
son. Further petition might please certain of the Quakers 
and satisfy certain English sympathizers, but it was not the 
mode of settlement which the Scotch-Irish or others of the 
"Whig party supported. Existing conditions were rapidly 
making all citizens of the province of equal consequence, and 
until this equality was recognized the latter immigrants of all 
men were least eager for restoration of the old calm. More- 
over, they felt that resistance to England was the only mode 
of inducing her to listen to their protests. Past experience 
had taught them that requests — unless supported by force — 
were little heeded by the English Crown. This feeling was 
more pronounced in the west than in the east, but it was not 
confined to that section. Ettwein, the Moravian clergyman 
already mentioned, speaks strongly of the feeling among his 
countrymen, and Graydon's view is in his memoirs. " As to 
the genuine sons of Hibernia it was enough for them to know 
that England was the antagonist. Stimulants here were 
wholly superfluous . . . and the great body of German 
farmers were readily gained to the patriot cause." The one 
thing needed was adequate leadership, and by neglecting this 
opportunity the moderate Whigs opened the door to radi- 
calism and bigotry, a condition worse than the oligarchy of 
early years. 

Dickinson was convinced of the justice of the American 
cause, but he had the strongest opposition to anything , 
approaching confusion in government. He had entered the 
contest against England with the hope that protest alone 
would induce that country to yield, and when it did not he 
was unprepared to go further. He had sanctioned illegal 
measures within his own State, but only because he con- 
sidered them temporary. As he saw the country drifting 
toward independence he saw as well that the illegal machinery 
of government which he had helped to call into existence 



Establishment of the Revohitionary Orgmiization. 207 

must bear the burden of colonial defence. The people whom 
he considered capable of self-government were in large part 
indifferent, or on the English side of the controversy, a side 
which he believed to be wrong and would not support, although 
he had not the trust in democracy which enabled him to put 
himself at the head of the new movement. He therefore 
advocated temporizing measures, and gradually lost his influ- 
ence. He was shrewd enough to see that independence meant 
the control of his own State by the less cultured elements, 
and he could not act in harmony with them. On the other 
hand, he could not put himself in opposition to Congress, for 
he considered that in the event of independence Congress 
alone would be able to rescue Pennsylvania from anarchy. 
In all these regards he was the type of that large moderate 
element in the State which refused to head any positive move- 
ment and was finally crushed for no other fault than the lack 
of a definite policy. The moderates combined a recognition 
of the justice of the American cause with an aversion for those 
who were upholding it, and there is nothing which democracy 
more quickly resents than a distrust of its own ability. 

From the beginning the popular movement in Pennsylvania 
had recognized in the Continental Congress and the illegal 
organization throughout the State, the means of gaining their 
rights not only from England but from the unrepresentative 
Assembly. It was on the recommendation of Congress that 
the various committees were chosen and the illegal system of 
government organized.^ On the committee organization rested 
the provincial convention which had been dictating to the legal 
Assembly, while in England the Congress was considered as 
usurping the powers of the State governments." The Colonial 

^See Force, IV, i, 966. 

* "If New York would be handed down to posterity as the truest friend of 
America let its legislature assert and exercise those powers which have been 
wrested from it by the Congress" [Force. IV, i, 1103]. 



2o8 The RcvoliUiofiary Movement in Pentisylvania. 

Assembly was discredited by its unwillingness to take decided 
action and there was a feeling that a State convention which 
would be willing to lead should be summoned. Several 
county committees in the spring of 1775 went so far as to 
select delegates to any convention that might be called,' and 
even its opponents recognized the position of supreme import- 
ance in State politics occupied by the new organization. 

Under these conditions, every unwilling grant made by the 
Assembly in response to insurgent demands only hastened its 
own overthrow. It was undermining its own position while it 
gave arms to its opponents. Immediately after the meeting 
of April 25, it had voted to raise 4,300 men for the defence 
of the colony. It had authorized the commissioners of the 
several counties to provide recruits with arms and accoutre- 
ments. It had appropriated ;^2,ooo for the use of the City 
Committee, and ^^5,000 to provide such colonial stores as the 
committee considered expedient. It had appointed Franklin, 
Wilson and Willing as congressional delegates. All measures 
had been taken under compulsion, and on May 13, 1775, it 
left the City Committee, in conjunction with the Committee 
of Safety, controlled by Franklin, in charge of the colony by 
adjourning until June. The influence of the old Assembly 
was weakening and doubters changed their allegiance. The 
governing board of the Moravian Church hastened to put 
itself as nearly as possible in line with the new order. It 
directed its members to prevent rebellion as long as they were 
able to do so, not to take up arms themselves if it was possible 
to substitute money contributions, but to subordinate them- 
selves to the existing government whatever it might be. " We 
never did nor never will act inimically to this country. . . . 
We will not oppose any civil rule or regulation where we can 
keep a good conscience nor . . . withdraw our shoulders 
from the common burden."^ 

1 Bedford, February 11 ; York, February 14 ; Berks, May 8. 
* Ettwein's statement. 



Establishmerit of the Revolutionary Organization. 209 

Even before the adjournment of the Assembly real power 
had been assumed by others. The Convention, the City 
Committee and the personality of Franklin were the control- 
ling forces in the colony, and with the departure of the 
Assembly there was no resistance to their control. The Gov- 
ernor was the only centre around which resistance could 
gather and he was practically ignored. Although the Coun- 
cil met until December,^ the executive did nothing more than 
sign measures passed by the Assembly, appoint a few civil 
officials whose power was on paper only, and examine accounts. 
The Committee of Safety was composed of twenty-five mem- 
bers and nominally stood for the legal Assembly, but it was 
practically a small oligarchy controlled by Franklin and it 
acted in unison with the extra-legal Congress and the popular 
sentiment. At no time during its sessions ^ were more than 
thirteen members present, and at times the numbdr sank to 
three or four.^ When it approved the rules which the associa- 
tors had themselves framed there were but nine or ten members 
present.^ The unwieldy city committee of sixty-seven members 
acted for both city and colony, and was the real force, as in the 
year before. Under its direction premiums were offered for 
the erection of fulling mills "agreeable to the Provincial 
Convention ;" ^ merchants were warned not to import goods 
through the Dutch colonies f individuals were compelled with 
" sorrow and contrition to confess their folly " in defending the 
King's cause ; powder mills were encouraged, and action 
taken against pilots who aided in landing forbidden merchan- 

^ December 9, Colonial Records, X, 275. 
' It was superseded in October. 
^Colonial Records, X, 282-373. 
* August 19, 26, 29. 
s Gazette, March 8, 1775. 
6 Gazette, April 5. 
14 



2IO The Revolutionary Movemejit in Pennsylvania. 

dise.^ No better example could have been set for the over- 
throw of a government than the power exercised by this 
unwieldy committee, whose only real support was popular 
sentiment and the national Congress.^ 

Meanwhile the extra legal movement for a State militia 
which had been given a great impetus by the news from 
Lexington, and the legislative appropriations, had taken 
definite shape. Voluntary companies of Associators had been 
formed, and on the reassembling of the legislature in June it 
was urged that these troops should be recognized as a regu- 
lar State organization. The Committee of the City and Lib- 
erties of Philadelphia, on June 23, petitioned the Assembly 
that a military force should be raised and that a Committee 
of Safety and Defense should be organized, composed either 
of members of the Assembly or of others, as might seem 
most desirable, who should be clothed with discretionary 
powers to act in case of invasion or threatened invasion, and 
that they should have power to appropriate such public 
monies as may be already raised, or to raise such further sums 
on credit or otherwise as may be necessary. Again the 
Assembly showed that it could be forced into the approval of 
illegal actions even such as delegated financial authority or 
formally deprived the governor of his executive powers. 
Measures were passed in accordance with the wishes of the 
petitioners. 

At once there arose the question of the attitude to be 
assumed towards the non-combatant sects, the last great 
question which the Assembly was allowed even nominally to 
settle. A compromise was attempted by a vote ^ in which as 
a recognition of conscientious scruples, the Assembly earn- 

^ Gazette, June 28, July 5, 19. 

2 The feeling toward Congress on the part of the Committee of Safety which 
was working with the City Committee is shown in FrankHn, Works, V, 536. 

3 June 30. 



Establishment of the Revolutionary Organization. 2 1 1 

estly recommended to the Associators for the defence of their 
country, and others, that they bear a tender and brotherly 
regard towards this class of their fellow subjects and country- 
men, and to these conscientious people it also recommended 
that they cheerfully assist in proportion to their abilities such 
persons as cannot spend both time and substance in the 
service of their country without great injury to themselves and 
families/ The same policy of recommending financial aid 
where actual service was not given was followed by the Com- 
mittee of Safety on July i8. People who could not conscien- 
tiously bear arms were asked to " contribute liberally in this 
time of universal calamity to the relief of their distressed 
brethren." ^ This action of the Committee on Safety was 
taken at the same time as that of the Congress and furnished 
the precedent on which laws as distinct from recommenda- 
tions were later enacted.^ 

Already the national body in its communication dated June 
22 recommending the formation of more companies of rifle- 
men by the colony, and the consolidating of the eight com- 
panies into one battalion, had resolved that the battalion 
should have " such Field and Under Officers as shall be 
recommended by the Assembly or Convention of the above 
Colony," thereby showing its willingness to accept either body 
as the provincial government, and by its own action, on June 
30, the Assembly in reality abandoned the power which in 
May it had temporarily resigned. On that day it resolved, 
" That this House approves the Association entered into by 
the good people of this Province for the Defense of their 
lives. Liberty and Property." " That if any invasion or land- 
ing of British troops or others, shall be made in this or the 
adjacent Colonies during the present Controversy, or any 

1 See Journal, July 5 ; also Votes, VI, 594. 

* Journal, July 19. 

3 See Pennsylvania Gazette, July 26, 1775. 



212 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

armed ships or vessels shall sail up the river Delaware in an 
hostile manner and such circumstances shall render it expe- 
dient in the judgment of the Committee hereafter to be 
appointed, for any Number of the Officers and Private men of 
the Association within this Colony to enter into actual service 
for repelling such hostile attempts this House will provide for 
the pay and necessary expenses of such Officers and Soldiers 
performing such military Duty while they are in such Actual 
Service." It provided for the encouragement of county 
levies; for the manufacture of saltpetre, gunpowder, etc.; for 
the collection of stores in the province, and appropriated 
;^3500 for the public defence. It then elected the members 
of the committee to superintend the work arranged, gave 
them practically unlimited power, and provided for the strik- 
ing of a sufficient amount of bills of credit to pay this 
expense. Finally having resolved that " the House taking 
into consideration that many of the good people of this 
Province are conscientiously scrupulous of bearing Arms, do 
hereby earnestly recommend to the Associators for the Defense 
of their Country and others, that they bear a tender and 
brotherly regard toward this Class of their Fellow Subjects 
and Countrymen ; and to these Conscientious people it is also 
recommended, that they cheerfully assist in Proportion to 
their Abilities, such Associators as cannot spend their time 
and substance in the public Service without great Injury to 
themselves and Families," the Assembly adjourned to Septem- 
ber i8.» 

By this action it is to be noted that the whole executive 
control of the province was placed in the hands of a committee ; 
that the Associators who were the leaders in violent action 
throughout the colony were approved ; and that the mild recom- 
mendation to have consideration for those to whom conscience 
was a bar against service was accompanied by a recommenda- 

1 Votes, VI, 593-594- 



Establishment of the Revobitionary Organization. 213 

tion to such persons to contribute financially to the cause. 
The Assembly, by implication at least, handed over to the 
tender mercies of the military all those who would neither 
fight nor pay. The same resolution which recommended that 
the Association have a tender regard for their fellows, recom- 
mended that their fellows have a financial regard for the 
Associators. When it is remembered that the Friends had 
already ^ officially declared that in no way would they support 
illegal and rebellious bodies, the weakness of the position 
assumed by the Assembly is evident. It was a time when 
decided and strong measures were becoming more and more 
necessary, yet the Assembly continued to temporize.* It did 

J January 30. 

* The changed attitude in Pennsylvania and the call for decided action were 
indicated by the sermons of Whig preachers. Thus, in a sermon upon the existing 
situation of American affairs [Christ Church, June 23, 1775], afterward printed 
and published by Humphreys, Dr. William Smith compared the English and 
American settlements to the division of the children of Israel by the river 
Jordan. Like the two and a-half tribes who separated from their fellows, the 
Americans obtained their holdings by contract. "Like Reuben and Gad, we 
have chosen our inheritance in a land separate from our fathers and brethren. 
This inheritance we likewise hold by a plain original contract entitling us to all 
the natural and improveable advantages of our situation and to a community of 
privileges with our brethren in every civil and religious respect, except that the 
throne or seat of empire (like the Jewish Altar) was to remain among them. 
We thought it our duty to build American Altars — {i. e., constitutions of govern- 
ment) — as nearly as we could upon the great British model." It is because 
England has changed her gods [i. c, the ideals on which governments were 
founded) that disagreements have come and embassies for reconciliation have 
failed. " The question now is, must we tamely surrender any part of our birth- 
right or of that gi-eat charter of privileges which we not only claim by inheritance 
but by the express terms of our colonization ? I say, God forbid. For here I 
wish to speak so plainly that neither my own principles nor those of the church 
to which I belong may be misunderstood. . . . Religion and Liberty must 
flourish or fall together in America. We pray that both may be perpetual. A 
continued submission to violence is no tenet of our church. . . . When the 
weight of power grows intolerable a people will fly to the constitution for shelter, 
and if able, resume that power which they nerer surrendered except so far as it 
might be used for the common safety." Compare with this the attitude of the 



214 l'^^^ Revolutionary Movement in Pemtsylvania. 

nothing to strengthen the cause of conservatism within the 
colony on which its own hfe depended, while allowing, and 
even aiding, in the growth of the radical movement which 
would inevitably assume control when activity became neces- 
sary. As it had formerly allowed itself to be driven step by 
step into rebellion by popular meetings and illegal conven- 
tions, the Assembly during 1775 submitted to the dictatorship 
of military forces which represented the same element in more 
radical form. Neglecting to strengthen the conservative posi- 
tion, it would not put itself at the head of the advance move- 
ment. It thus paved the way for its own destruction. This 
destruction was inevitable unless peace should be restored by 
English concessions or quiet enforced by English arms. As 
in 1760, the Assembly could not lead in war and control 
passed to others. 

extreme faction among the Quakers. Congress had appointed July 20 as a day of 
fasting and prayer. At the monthly meeting, on June 30, according to Marshall 
[Diary, June 30], it was said that "J. P. (James Pemberton) took much pains 
in endeavoring to persuade the auditors and their acquaintance by no means to 
keep the twentieth of next month as a day of prayer and fasting." "Here," 
remarks Marshall, "is another flagrant testimony to the decay of primitive 
Christianity, viz: ' In the time of trouble call upon me.' " 



CHAPTER XII. 
The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 



Authorities. 

The main authorities for this chapter have been cited already. The Votes of 
the Assembly, the Colonial Records and the Pennsylvania Archives contain the 
official accounts of the revolutionary movement as it gradually crystallized into 
petitions and votes, but the press and pamphlet literature of the period shows the 
tendencies of the times more minutely. Of the newspapers, the Packet and 
Journal are especially useful, containing many expressions of opinion which are 
lacking in the more carefully written pamphlets. I have found valuable letters 
in the Force Collection at Washington and also in the publications of the Histori- 
cal Society of Pennsylvania, which throw additional light on colonial conditions, i 
Diaries and journals like those of Christopher Marshall and Jacob Ettwein, * 
although colored by the authors' personality, are of assistance in showing the 
motives which governed the leaders in provincial politics as well as in picturing 
the course of events. ' 

For one who does not have access to the original correspondence of the Friends 
or to the records of their monthly and quarterly meetings, the volumes of President 
Sharpless are extremely helpful, and for the period upon which we are now entering 
no other secondary authority gives a better account of Pennsylvania. Other aids 
that have been used are the Journals of Congress, the writings of Galloway, 
Franklin and Dickinson, and the life of the last-named statesman by the late 
Dr. Stille. 

The year 1775 was notable in Pennsylvania history for 
more than the creation of new legislative and administrative 
bodies within the State. Throughout the colony, and particu- 
larly in the city of Philadelphia, military organizations were 
being completed which were a great support to the radical 
thinkers when the final test of authority was made. 

Early in the year the Assembly had appropriated money 
for the defence of the province. On September 16 the Com- 
mittee of Safety resolved " that Colo. Dickinson and Colo. 
Cadwalader be a Committee to draw up a Memorial to the 
Honorable House of Assembly setting forth the necessity of 
their granting a further sum of Money, and recommending 

(215) 



2 1 6 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the building Magazines in some convenient place." ^ On the 
twenty-ninth the following Memorial was adopted by the Com- 
mittee and presented to the Assembly : " To the Honorable 
the Representatives of the Freemen, &c. — The memorial of the 
Committee of Safety respectfully shevveth : That the said Com- 
mittee, in obedience to the orders of the House have taken 
upon them the execution of the important trust committed to 
them, and have proceeded to such measures as appeared to 
them necessary to effectuate the purposes for which they were 
appointed. . . . The sum of money granted by the House 
at their last sessions, has been either wholly expended, or 
remitted for the purchase of Arms and Ammunition, and 
a considerable sum is still necessary to fulfil the engagements 
already made for the above purposes and for the paying and 
vitualing of the Men in the Service. 

" It must be obvious to the House, that much yet remains 
to be done to accomplish their salutary intentions, particularly 
if the British Ministry should obstinately persist in their 
present arbitrary Measures. Should this be the case (which 
from the present appearance of things seems but too probable), 
this opportunity may perhaps be the only one we shall be 
poss'd of to prepare the necessary means for the Defence of 
our just Rights, for there can be no doubt that vigorous 
exertions will be made to intercept future supplies. The Com- 
mittee, therefore, apprehended it to be their indispensable 
Duty earnestly to recommend it to the House, to grant such 
future liberal aids, at their present sessions, as may in their 
wisdom, be judged adequate to the exigencies of the Province 
at this very important Crisis." After recommending the estab- 
lishment of a powder magazine, the Committee submits " to 
the House a matter interesting to the public welfare" in the 
following words : 

' There were but ten members present when the resolution passed [Colonial 
Records, X, 338]. 



The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 2 1 7 

" The military Association entered into by numbers of the 
good People of this Province has received the approbation of 
the House and undoubtedly deserves every encouragement, 
as a Body of Freemen, animated by the love of Liberty, 
and trained to the use of Arms affords the most certain and 
effectual Defence against the approaches of Slavery and 
Oppression. It is to be wished therefore that this spirit 
could have been more universally diffused ; but the Associ- 
ators complain, and with great appearance of reason, that 
while they are subjected to expences to accoutre themselves 
as soldiers, and their affairs suffer considerably by the time 
necessarily employed in acquiring a knowledge of the Military 
Art, very many of their Country Men who have not associated 
are entirely free from these Inconveniences. They conceive that 
where the Liberty of all is at stake, every Man should assist in 
its support, and that where the cause is common, and the bene- 
fits derived from an opposition are universal, it is not consonant 
to Justice or Equity that the Burthens should be partial. 

"The Committee therefore would submit it to the wisdom 
of the House, whether, at this time of general Distress and 
Dangers, some plan should not be devised to oblige the 
assistance of every member of the community. But as there 
are some Persons, who, from their religious Principles are 
scrupulous of the Lawfulness of bearing Arms, this Com- 
mittee, from a tender regard to the Consciences of such, would 
venture to propose that their contributions to the Common 
Cause should be pecuniary, and for that purpose a Rate or 
Assessment be laid on their estates equivalent to the expense 
and loss of time incurred by the Associators. A measure of this 
kind appears to be founded on the Principles of impartial Justice, 
calculated to appease the complaints which have been made, 
likely to give general Satisfaction, and be, of course, beneficial to 
the great Cause we are engaged in. — B. Franklin, President." ^ 

* Votes, VI, 6cx); Colonial Records, X, 348. 



2 1 8 The Revolutionary Moveme^it in Pennsylvania. 

The Assembly took no action upon this memorial during 
the remainder of the session/ but the sentiment expressed by 
the Committee in their resolution was by this time widely 
diffused throughout the community. Already on September 
27, the Associators, in a petition to the Assembly, had made 
the same request as the Committee, urging that until some 
such measure was taken many Associators would refuse to 
sign the resolutions for their government. They also observed 
" that people sincerely and religiously scrupulous are but few 
in comparison to those who, upon this occasion as well as 
others, make Conscience a Convenience ; — that a very consid- 
erable share of the Property of this province is in the hands 
of people professing to be of tender Conscience in Military 
matters and that the Associators think it extremely hard that 
they should risk their lives and injure their fortunes in the 
Defence of those who will not be of the least assistance in 
this struggle." ^ 

The attempt upon the part of the Associators to make 
service in the State militia compulsory, or to require those 
who would not serve, to compensate for such inaction by the 
payment of additional taxes, was very unwelcome to many of 
the Friends and their Baptist and Mennonist allies. Especially 
was this the case when the volunteers were supported in their 
complaint by the Committee of Safety, by the Committees for 
the Counties, and at length by the national Congress.^ The 

' On September 30, the memorial of the Committee of Safety was "referred to 
the serious attention of the succeeding Assembly" [Votes, VI, 609]. 

2 This feeling found general expression in the newspapers. Thus, " Caractacus," 
in the Packet of August 21, said: " I can not help thinking it a little extraordi- 
nary, that the importer of a few English goods should be advertised as an enemy 
to his country, and all intercourse forbidded with him, and that an American 
should be suffered to fold his arms in his breast while every part of his country is 
open to the attack of an enemy. Such a man is an importer of slavery, and in 
spite of all his boasted zeal or artful subterfuges, I maintain that he is in the 
worst sense of the words, AN enemy to his country." 

3 For the presentation in the Assembly of the resolve of Congress and of the 
Committee for Philadelphia, see Votes of Assembly, VI, 627. 



The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 219 

non-combatant sects realized that unless energetic action was 
taken the only body in the colony which they recognized as 
legal — the Assembly — might also take radical measures 
against them, and they accordingly began a counter cam- 
paign. On October 27 ^ a petition was presented to the 
Assembly which insisted that the reason immigrants came to 
America was to preserve their rights and privileges, and that 
the original compact made in England, as well as the Consti- 
tution of the province, expressly protected them against any 
violation of their conscientious scruples. The petitioners con- 
sidered themselves " engaged with Christian Meekness and 
Firmness . to petition and remonstrate ' ' against any infraction 
of civil or religious liberty, yet they believed it their " Duty 
to submit to the Powers which in the Course of Divine Provi- 
dence" had been set over them and that "just Reasoning and 
Arguments " were the proper means of redress.' 

This petition was at once answered by counter propositions 
from the Committee for the City and Liberties of Philadelphia, 
and by memorials from both officers and privates of the Asso- 
ciators.^ These bodies evidently considered that the time for 
" Reasoning and Arguments " was past and that action was 
necessary. Owing to its manner of election the Assembly 
could not be controlled from within, but it was possible that 
it might again be overawed. On October 30 ^ a motion had 
been made and vigorously supported that the public be 
admitted to hear the debates of the house, but it had been 
defeated 18 to 9.^ The next day the sixty-six members of 
the Philadelphia City Committee, incensed by this note of 

1 Votes, VI, 634. 

2 Votes, VI, 638-642. 

» Votes, VI, 637. 

* Sixteen of the majority came from the eastern counties and the other two from 
Lancaster, while the minority was composed of seven western representatives and 
two members from Philadelphia. 



220 The Revolutionary Movement ifi Pe^insylvania. 

defiance from the Assembly, gathered and marched in double 
file to the State House in order to emphasize the importance 
of their own petition. This appeal, which had been framed 
by a sub-committee of seven, took up one by one the argu- 
ments of the non-combatants and endeavored to overthrow 
them. " If the People called Quakers held these principles 
(of non-resistance) ' upwards of an hundred years ago,' and 
if the first Proprietor of this province, the Honourable Wm, 
Penn, Esq., was ' united with them in Religious Profession 
and Principle ' which they expressly allege, it is very unac- 
countable to your Petitioners, that the said Wm. Penn should 
receive a Charter from King Charles H., in the year 1681, in 
the 1 6th section of which we find 'a power given to him, his 
Heirs and Assigns by themselves or their Captains, or other 
their Officers, to levy, muster and train all Sorts of men, of 
what condition soever or wheresoever born in the Province, for 
the Time being, and to make War — as fully and freely as any 
Captain General hath ever had.' . . . If also none but Quakers 
came over at first to this Province with the said Proprietor, 
and the Colony was intended for them, as the Addressors 
seem to intimate, your Petitioners cannot conceive that any 
other Persons could be made Captains or Officers or could be 
levied, mustered or trained at that time but themselves. . . . 
Be this as it may, your Petitioners beg leave to deliver as their 
humble opinion, that self Preservation is the first Principle of 
Nature and a Duty that every man indispensably owes not 
only to himself but to the Supreme Director and Governor of 
the Universe who gave him a Being, and that in a State of 
Political Society and Government all Men by their Original 
Compact and Agreement are obliged to unite in defending 
themselves and those of the Same Community against such 
as shall attempt unlawfully to deprive them of their just 
Rights and Liberties, — that those who withdraw themselves. 



TJie Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 221 

from this Compact cannot be entitled to the Protection of 
Society." ^ 

The Associators did not hesitate to give the Assembly a 
hint that while they wished to obtain their demands from a 
legal source there were other powers in the colony which 
might be made available should the Assembly prove untract- 
able. Ten days earlier ^ the City Committee had said to the 
legislature : " This Honourable House being the body from 
whom the People most earnestly wish to receive the Regu- 
lations which are become so indispensably necessary, the 
Petitioners do most earnestly pray that this Honourable House 
will recornmend to the Inhabitants of this Province such 
military Regulations as, in their Wisdom, shall carry the 
recommendation of the Continental Congress effectually into 
Execution." The Associators go further. "As we fear the 
people will not longer submit to see the publid Burthen so 
unequally borne, we earnestly beg, to preserve the peace of 

^ The Committee of Safety, whose remonstrance was framed by a sub-committee 
of seven, headed by McKean, also argued against the Quakers: 

" These gentlemen want to withdraw their persons and their fortunes from the 
service of the country at the time when their country stands most in need of them. 
If the patrons and friends of liberty succeed in the present glorious struggle they 
and their posterity will enjoy all the benefits to be derived from it equally with 
those who procured it, without contributing a single penny. If the friends of 
liberty fail they will risk no forfeitures, but be entitled by their behavior to pro- 
tection and countenance from the British ministry, and will probably be promoted 
to office. This they seem to deserve and expect." The Associators and more 
radical leaders could not understand the Quaker position. The danger from 
England was evident to all. Dr. Fothergill, in August, 1775, had written to 
James Pemberton: "America has nothing to expect henceforth but severity — I 
believe there is no scheme however contrary to the principles of religion and 
humanity that should be offered as likely to subdue America that would not be 
adopted" [Sharpless: The Quakers in the Revolution, p. 122]. It was not lack 
of information regarding British feeling which kept the Friends conservative, but 
rather an honest conviction that forcible resistance to England would be a sin. 
The more ardent spirits in America could not understand this position and there- 
fore had no sympathy with its advocates. 

* October 20, Votes, VI, 627. 



222 Tlic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the Province and the Consequence of your Honourable House 
(which we would wish to govern us in this important struggle, 
in preference to any other Body), you will be pleased to 
take in your consideration our former Memorials relative to 
our Association." 

These petitions fanned the hostility between the radicals 
and conservatives within the province and some of the minor 
non-combatant sects began to acquiesce in the popular 
demands. In their petition to the Assembly of November 7/ 
the Mennonists and German Baptists, while still maintaining 
their conscientious scruples against fighting, expressed a wil- 
lingness to pay for their inaction, and the house seized upon 
this mode of compromising the matter. It resolved on the 
following day that " the Military Association entered into for 
the Defence of this Province ought to be continued, encour- 
aged and supported ;" that it be " recommended to all Male 
white Persons within this Province between the ages of six- 
teen and fifty years who have not already Associated and are 
not conscientiously scrupulous against bearing Arms to join 
the said Association immediately ; . . . that all Male 
White Persons between the ages aforesaid, capable of bearing 
Arms who shall not Associate for the Defence of this 
Province, ought to contribute an equivalent to the time spent 
by the Associators in acquiring the Military discipline, Minis- 
ters of the Gospel of all Denominations, and servants pur- 
chased bona fide, and for valuable consideration, only 
excepted," and "that the sum of eighty thousand pounds be 
immediately struck in Bills of Credit for answering the 
present exigencies of the Province." The measures thus 
resolved upon were afterwards, so far as was necessary, framed 
into bills and enacted by the house,^ and although there was 
a close vote on the question of the rules for the regulation of 

1 Votes, VI, 645. 

* Votes, VI, 649-51, November 16-18. 



The Advatice of the Revolutionary Movement. 223 

the Associators prescribing their drill, etc., ' it seemed that 
the Assembly by strict obedience might possibly retain its 
former authority within the province. An added dissatisfac- 
tion, however, was created by the notification received on 
November 9 from the colony's representative at London that 
the King would give no answer to the second petition of the 
Continental Congress. At once the question of further colonial 
action, either alone or in subordination to the Congress, arose 
and where national independence was the issue, the Assem- 
bly's efforts at compromise were no longer successful. \ 

In Congress independence had been urged as early as July, 
but Franklin knew that the support of the moderate party in 
his own colony could not be secured for such a proposal 
until the hope of successful protest had been disappointed or 
until there was an established government ready to take the 
position from which the King was to be deposed. With the 
radicals, independence of England was secondary to independ- 
ence of the Assembly," but Franklin wished if possible to 

1 On November 15 the question of rules for the regulation of the Associators 
came before the house, but no rules were adopted until November 25, the last 
day of the session. An indication of the closeness of the vote on rules was given 
on November 17, when on the question whetherthe Associators should meet twenty- 
two times between that day and the succeeding October for drill, it was decided 
by the casting vote of the Speaker that they should not, and by the same vote 
twenty such meetings were allowed. Thirteen of the fourteen votes against both 
measures came from the east and twelve of them from the counties of Chester and 
Bucks. All non-Associators within the ages stated were taxed £2 \os. above the 
regular assessment [Votes, VI, 665]. 

2 It must not be assumed however that the cause of independence had few or no 
adherents in Pennsylvania during 1775- Even before the battles of Lexington 
and Concord, Galloway, who would not exaggerate the size of such a party, had 
declared it to be of respectable proportions. In regard to his own pamphlet, A 
Candid Examination, etc., he wrote to a friend in New York : •' I find it decried 
by none but Independents or such as are determined to bring about a total sepa- 
ration of the two countries at all events, and they are, you may be assured, but 
one-fourth part of our people." The increase of the Whigs he considered due 
to the bad news from London, and when the resolution of Parliament to uphold 



224 '^^^'^ Revolutionary Move7nc7it in Pennsylvania. 

unite the moderate and radical parties in favor of a strong 
government in both State and nation. In July ^ he presented 
to Congress a plan for an American federation which could 
easily be changed into an independent government. If his 
proposal could have been united with that of independence 
and the two issues made to stand or fall together Pennsylva- 
nia might have been won. The time however was not ripe 
for sucli a combination ; the radical leaders throughout the 
country considered it best to urge the propositions separately, 
and the question of independence was proposed first. Frank- 
lin therefore devoted his attention to his own colony. He 
increased the means of communication between east and west, 
forwarded efforts for increased representation of the Susque- 
hanna Valley in the Assembly and increased the compactness 
and efficiency of the extra-constitutional organizations 
throughout the State so that in case of need there would be 
influential forces on which reliance could be placed.^ 

The defeat in Congress of the movement for a national 
government had exactly the effect upon the more moderate 
Pennsylvania Whigs which Franklin had anticipated. So long 
as there was no other authority in America than a Congress 
to which each State sent delegates, but whose official powers 
had never been clearly defined, Dickinson and his followers, 
distrusting the radical party in their own State, hesitated to 
join the forces favorable to independence. In their opinion, a 
conflict with Great Britain, which had such an object as its 
avowed purpose, would, if unsuccessful, subject Pennsylvania 
to much harsher treatment than an unsuccessful conflict in 

the King and the armed conflict became known, he wrote to the same friend : 
"We are on the brink of a precipice big with the fate of America" [Letters, 
April I, and August 17, 1775, in Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 
XXI, 481]. 

1 July 21, Works, V, 548. 

2 See for example the improved postal service between east and west advertised 
in the Journal of August 30. 



The Advatice of the Revolutionary Movement. 225 

behalf of the maintenance of constitutional rights within the 
empire. If independence was declared as the motive, success 
was indispensable, and without a strong central government 
Dickinson considered success very doubtful. Such a govern- 
ment would assist in gaining an alliance with France. It 
would place the national finances in better condition and it 
would declare to all, the religious, social and political policy 
which America intended to maintain. More than this, the 
establishment of a strong national government would prevent 
the forces of license and anarchy controlling the economic and 
pohtical policies of the individual colonies.^ 

For these reasons the conservative wing in the Pennsyl- 
vania legislature, supported, of course, by the English sympa- 
thizers, tried to keep the local government in the hands of the 
Assembly and if possible delay or defeat the movement for 
separation from England. Defensive war was adopted as the 
true American plan, and in its instructions of November 9 

' Dickinson's position on the question of independence is given in the following 
extract from his speech in Congress on the proposal of 1776. [Gordon, History 
of Pennsylvania, 534 and following]: " Prudence required that they should not 
abandon certain for uncertain objects. . . . What is the object of these 
chimeras hatched in the days of discord and of war ? . . . The restraining 
power of the king and the parliament is indispensable to protect the colonies from 
disunion and civil war ; and the most cruel hostility which Britain could wage 
against them, the surest mode of compelling obedience, would be to leave them 
a prey to their own jealousies and animosities. For, if the dread of English 
Arms were removed, province would rise against province, city against city, and 
the weapons now assumed to combat the common enemy would turn against 
themselves. . . . Even when supported by the powerful hand of England, 
the colonists have abandoned themselves to discords, and sometimes to violence, 
from the paltry motives of territorial limits, and distant jurisdictions. What, then, 
might they not expect, when their minds were heated, ambition roused, and arms 
in the hands of all ? . . . By changing the object of the war the union of 
the people would be destroyed," and if successful " they would have to dread, 
should the counter-poise of monarchy be removed, that the democratic power 
would prostrate all barriers, and involve the state in ruin." In his opinion these 
jealousies and rivalries could be prevented only by the establishment of a strong . 
central government to replace that of England. 



226 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

to the Congressional delegation the Assembly declared : * 
" The Trust reposed in you is of such a nature and the modes 
of exercising it may be so diversified in the Course of your 
Deliberations, that it is scarcely possible to give you instruc- 
tions respecting it. We therefore, in general, direct that you 
— or any four of you — meet in Congress the Delegates of the 
several Colonies now assembled in the City, and any such 
Delegates as may meet in Congress next year ; that you con- 
sult together on the present critical and alarming state of 
public Affairs ; that you exert your utmost endeavors to agree 
upon and recommend, such Measures as you shall judge to 
afford the best Prospect of obtaining Redress of American 
Grievances and restoring that Union and Harmony between 
Great Britain and the Colonies so essential to the Welfare and 
Happiness of both Countries. 

" Though the oppressive Measures of the British Parlia- 
ment and Administration have compelled us to resist their 
violence by Force of Arms, yet we strictly enjoin you that 
you in Behalf of this Colony, dissent from, and utterly reject, 
any Propositions, should such be made, that may cause or lead 
to, a Separation from our Mother Country or a Change of the 
Form of this Government. You are directed to make Report 
of your Proceedings to this House. . . . signed by Order 
of the House, John Morton, Speaker." 

Nothing was more evident from these instructions than that 
the members of the Assembly believed that " this Govern- 
ment " and the connection with Great Britain would probably 
stand or fall together and that the legal authorities would 
advance towards revolution only under compulsion. The 
King, in his speech to Parliament, declared that the colonies 
designed by their petition " to amuse by vague expressions of 
attachment to the parent state, and the strongest protestations 
of loyalty to their king, while they were preparing for a gen- 

1 Votes, .VI, 641. 



The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 227 

eral revolt, and that their rebelHouswarwas manifestly carried 
on for the purpose of establishing an independent empire." 
This declaration, while it undoubtedly made converts, both in 
England and America, to the sentiments it expressed, came 
very far from truly describing the attitude of the majority in the 
Pennsylvania Assembly. That majority eagerly desired that 
some path should be opened by which it could escape from 
its existing predicament. Congress also, if we may place 
confidence in Franklin,^ up to the time of the news from 
England regarding its petition, would have been only too 
willing to have become friendly again, but by December the 
sentiment had changed. While affairs were at this critical 
juncture, while the credit as well as the sentiment of the 
colony was doubtful,^ the Assembly, on November 25, 
adjourned to the following February. Again, as,in the preced- 
ing spring, the reins of government dropped from its hands, 
and the organized committees increased their power by a con- 
stant exercise of authority. 

At once the radical movement increased in violence. No 
sooner had the instructions of the Assembly to the Congres- 
sional delegates appeared in the press than replies were put 
before the people. In the Journal of November 22, "A 
Lover of Order," thus addressed the legislature and in his 
address there is shown the same threat of appeal to a higher 
power that has already been noticed in the petitions. " To 
the members of the House of the Assembly of Pennsylvania. 
I address you by the above title for the want of another 
because the line of business you 7iow move in differs as much 
from the business of an Assembly, acting by virtue of what 
you call the present Constitution as if you professedly renounced 
the name. But be your title what it may I cannot help 

1 Works, V, 540, 541. 

2 See the Complaint of the City Committee that the Bills of Credit were not 
being taken by all. Votes, VI, 652, November 22. 



228 The Revolutionary Movement hi Pennsylvania. 

expressing my surprise at seeing in your votes of the 9th 
instant a?i essay for instructing the delegates of this province 
respecting their conduct in the continental congress and the 
said instructions couched in terms amounting to a command. 
When I voted at the last election for a representative in the 
house where you now sit, I never meant to invest any of you 
with such a power and I protest against your assuming it. 
The Delegates in Congress are not the Delegates of the 
Assejtibly but of the people — of the body at large. For con- 
venience sake only, we at present consent to your nomi?iating 
them but we may as well be without delegates if they must 
act solely under your influence, and thus circumstanced they 
can only sit there as cyphers. . . Instruction is as 

sacredly the right of the people as election. It was your duty 
to give them all possible information but nothing further, for 
respecting that body of men, you are but as individuals. As 
I hope never to see the day when the Continent shall be with- 
out a Congress so I hope in proper season to see a Congress 
chosen by the people — by which means not only every colony 
but every part of it will be represented. As an individual I 
have no right to instruct, I can only convey to them my 
wishes, which are that the moment they enter the threshold of 
Congress, that they lay aside all private interest and connection 
and consider themselves not acting provincially but conti- 
nentally. That as men they will disregard all undue influence, 
that as fathers they will think for posterity and with those wishes 
I leave them to God and to their own Consciences." 

Upon this a writer in the Ledger of November 25 attempted 
to defend the instructions, urging ov^er the signature of 
" Associator " that there was great danger of independence 
being declared by the Congress unless adequate precautions 
were taken. To this, in turn " Independent Whig " replied' 
as follows : 

' Journal, November 29. 



. The Advance of the Revobitionary Movement. 229 

" The Honorable House as well as Associator seem desper- 
ately afraid of independency. I would not condemn such fears 
but ... I see no way to avoid it . . . except by 
our absolute submission. ... I am for independency 
until she (Great Britain) offers us better terms than slavery or 
grape shot. We have no better yet nor are we likely to have 
till it is out of her power to prevent us having what we 
please." A week later/ " Lover of Order," under the guise 
of "A Continental Farmer," declared that the framer of those 
resolutions of instructions was no patriot, but was more likely 
trying to win the favor of Great Britain. " Beware of the 
Galloway rock, young soldier." Not only had the Assembly, 
in his opinion, no right to instruct the delegates, but it was 
very inexpedient to do so, for the immediate future was 
hard to forecast. Enthusiasm was indeed being aroused to 
a high pitch within the city.^ 

1 Journal, December 6. 

2 On July 23, 1775, Dr. Benjamin Church wrote to Major Kane at Boston, " A 
view to independence appears to be more and more general. Should Great 
Britain declare war against the colonies they would be lost forever. . . . For God's 
sake prevent it by a speedy accommodation. " " The people of Connecticut are rav- 
ing in the cause of liberty. . . . The Jerseys are not a whit behind Connecticut in 
zeal. The Philadelphians exceed them both " [Force: American Archives, Fourth 
Series, 2, 1 7 14]. See also the letter to the Committee of Correspondence of 
Philadelphia, March 28, 1775 [Force, IV, 2, 238], which declared that the radi- 
cals, as early as that date were controlling the Colony of Pennsylvania. " Have 
not the loyal friends in your and the adjacent provinces published their dissent 
from the mad independent resolves of your republican Congress, and all your 
illegal and unwarrantable combinations ? ' ' Antoninus in the Journal [October 
15, 1775], ridiculed the idea that separation from England meant subjection to 
the tyranny of another State. He ridiculed also the assertion that independence 
meant the cutting of each other' s throats or " a combination between Massachu- 
setts Presbyterians and Virginia Churchmen to persecute, if not exterminate the 
poor Quakers, Anabaptists and all other persuasions. " Taking up the result of the 
last war he said : " What have the common people either in Britain or America 
had in return for their so freely lavished blood and treasures. . . . New taxes." 
The net result of it all "is a dependence upon the King's will. . . . To talk 
of our breaking any compact or constitution with the parent state — aiming at 



230 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

On November 29 Jefferson wrote to Randolph : '* There is 
not in the British Empire a man who more cordially loves a 
union with Great Britain than I do. But by the God that 
made me I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on 
such terms as the British Parliament proposes and in this I 
think I speak the sentiments of America." Nine days later 
Franklin wrote that independence was probable and that the 
whole continent was firmly united against Great Britain and 
in behalf of liberty.' Before this time it had been urged 
that it was only England's harsh treatment that justified the 
colonial demand for the natural rights of Americans. A more 
advanced tone was now taken. Pamphlets like Burgh's 
Political Disquisitions were published, and the press, as 
requested, made copious extracts from them. " For my 
part," declared the author of one such tract, " I can not see 
the use of all this hesitating and mincing matters. Why 
may we not say at once without any urgency of distress, 
without any provocation by oppression of government, and 
though the safety of the whole should not appear to be in 
any immediate danger, if the people of the country think they 

independence or revolting and setting up for ourselves thereby incurring the 
imputation of rebellious and wicked children is just as fair and pertinent as to 
accuse a son who had taken a wife and plantation for himself and when he had 
by his own labor, subdued the soil, and was enjoying from it a comfortable sub- 
sistence, of ingratitude — or want of filial duty if he refused to admit of his 
father's absolute direction of all his affairs. ... In every civilized community 
one would expect to find a time when men ought to be esteemed of age to deter- 
mine and act for themselves." Respecting the ancient constitutional mode of 
government by King, Lords and Commons in the kingdom of Great Britain he 
argued : '* Why the young agrarian states where no such being as a Lord exists 
should have any regard to a set of prerogatives which a number of petty tyrants 
usurped and by force of arms confirmed to themselves, I have not hitherto had 
penetration to discover. If a republican government as it was managed in 
England, where, by the way it never did in our knowledge exist, failed to give 
peace and security then it has been more fortunate in Holland. And doubtless 
the fitness or inadequacy of peculiar forms of government are ever relative to the 
circumstances of the people for whom they are designed." 
1 Works, V, 543. 



The Advance of the Revolutionary Movement. 231 

should be in any respect happier under republican govern- 
ment than under monarchial, or under monarchical than under 
republican, and find that they can bring about a change of 
government without greater inconveniences than the future 
advantages are likely to balance, why may we not say that 
they have a sovereign absolute and uncontroulable right to 
change or new model their government as they please ? The 
authority of a government is only superior to that of a 
minority of people, the majority are rightfully superior to it" ^ 
Essays were also published " wherein the lawfulness of Revo- 
lutions are Demonstrated in a Chain of Consequences from 
the Fundamental Principles of Society." The Continental 
Congress, so a "Jersey Farmer " argued in the Journal, had 
the same duty to perform as had the barons of Magna Charta.^ 
Above all of it was felt that the time had come when vigor- 
ous action on the part of the colony was necessary, and that 

* Burgh's Political Disquisitions, Bell, Philadelphia, 1775. 

* Two stanzas of Freneau illustrate the bold justification of the American 
cause which was preached and the consequences which must follow the defeat of 

the cause : 

" If to control the cunning of a knave. 

Freedom adore, and scorn the name of slave. 
If to protect against a tyrant's laws, 
And arm for vengeance in a righteous cause. 
Be deemed rebellion — 'tis a harmless thing. 
This bug-bear name, like death, has lost its sting." 



" If Britain conquers, help us, Heaven, to fly ! 
Lend me your wings, ye ravens of the sky. 
If Britain conquers, — we exist no more : 
These lands shall redden with their children's gore, 
Who turned to slaves, their fruitless toils shall moan — 
Toil in these fields that once they call their own ! ' ' 

The Poems of Philip Freneau, p. 75. 
Here is expressed no desire for constitutional resistance but a determination to 
fight the trouble out to the bitter end. The press had numerous contributions 
which showed the same spirit, and which may be taken as a good illustration of 
the confidence which filled the hearts of Whigs as the first actions of the war 
resulted in victories for the Americans. 



232 The Revolutionary Moz>eme7it in Petmsylvayiia. 

such Assemblies as had been sitting in Philadelphia were not 
capable of sturdy independent action. Petitions for more 
equitable representation of which we have spoken were rein- 
forced by appeals hke the following : In electing members 
for the new house " reject all timorous fearful and dastardly 
spirits, men who having good principles either dare not own 
them or dare not act according to them. . , . Cast off 
the trammels and fetters by which some of you have been 
bound by a spirit of party. . . . Now my countrymen is 
the time to help yourselves ! . . . Now act honestly and 
boldly for liberty or forget the glorious and charming sound ! " ' 
The union that was felt to exist between local and national 
grievances is shown by this writer's concluding words : " Seize 
the present opportunity of redressing our provincial griev- 
ances and let us now repair the faults which time and experi- 
ence have discovered in our constitution in such a manner 
that it may be transmitted safely to the latest posterity." 
This was the spirit in which Pennsylvania entered upon the 
last year of her colonial experience, 

'Journal, September 15. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

The Fall of the Quaker Government. 



Authorities. 

During the latter portion of 1775 ^^'^ throughout the succeeding year the revolu- 
tion in Pennsylvania became thoroughly identified with the broader national move- 
ment. The fact that the Continental Congress held its sessions in Philadelphia and 
that the leaders of the national sentiment were eager to win the populous and wealthy 
State of Pennsylvania to the side of independence, makes the general literature 
of the revolution useful in understanding the course of local events. Among 
such sources may be mentioned the Journals of the Continental Congress and the 
Madison Papers, the Works of John Adams, Jefferson and Franklin, and the 
selection from the writings of Samuel Adams and Gerry found in the lives of those 
statesmen by Wells and Austin. The several collections of tracts such as those 
found in Almon's Remembrancer do not need to be mentioned. Of the news- 
papers of Philadelphia, the Gazette, Packet and Evening Post,, are probably the 
best illustrators of the moderate and radical sentiment. The Ledger was much 
more conservative in its tone, and in November, 1776, this paper was forced to 
suspend publication. 

Excellent secondary accounts of this period are given by Thomas F. Gordon 
in his History of Pennsylvania, by President Sharpless in his volume entitled The 
Quakers in the Revolution, and by Westcott in his History of Philadelphia. The 
attitude of Dickinson throughout the years 1775-76 is carefully treated by Stills, 
but the author's admiration for the subject of his biography causes him to place 
the attitude of the Quaker statesman in the most favorable light possible and 
some students may not agree with all the views expressed by the biographer. It 
is unnecessary to do more than to refer to the various magazine articles on this 
period. No student can afford to neglect the work which has been done in Penn- 
sylvania history, especially the articles published in the Pennsylvania Magazine of 
History and Biography. 

In 1776 the revolutionary movement in Pennsylvania reached 
its climax and under a new government the colony declared 
in favor of American independence. The foundations of the 
new provincial organization were political equality and "the 
inalienable rights of humanity." To no colony did the declar- 
ation of independence appeal more forcibly than to Pennsyl- 
vania, and no people were more determined to make its 

(233) 



234 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

precepts their rule of action than the advocates of a new 
regime within that State. From the earliest settlement race 
and religion had prevented union between the east and the 
west. By a policy of neglect and indifference to their eco- 
nomic interests, the Quaker party controlling the Assembly 
had alienated the Germans and Irish of the Susquehanna 
Valley and added financial and social discontent to the racial 
and religious differences, which for a half century had threat- 
ened to disrupt the colony. During the same period dissatis- 
faction had been aroused in the city of Philadelphia and a 
party formed which supported the west in its antagonism to 
the constitutional legislature. 

These deep-lying dissensions explain the fall of the col- 
onial government at the time of the assertion of national 
independence. Without them the course of the revolution in 
Pennsylvania would have differed but little from that followed 
in Massachusetts or Maryland. There was the same growth 
of public sentiment against England in Pennsylvania that was 
found elsewhere, and had the Assembly been a truly representa- 
tive body with a united people behind it there was no reason 
why it should not have responded to that growth. The elec- 
tions of 1775 came while the people were still aroused over 
the struggles of the previous spring and had popular senti- 
ment been able to find its way into the Assembly the composi- 
tion of that body would have corresponded more nearly to that 
of other colonial legislatures, although Quaker conservatism 
would undoubtedly have made itself felt in the Eastern 
Counties. The suffrage qualifications within the municipality 
kept Philadelphia under the control of the conservative, 
well-to-do classes, and when the elections in April, 1776, con- 
vinced the masses of the people that no change of policy 
could be expected from the legal officials of either city or 
colony recourse was taken to the committees. It is idle, 
however, to assert that the city mob, even when supported by 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 235 

the passive acquiescence of the Continental Congress, could 
have overthrown the established government of the colony- 
had that government been popular throughout the west or 
had a peaceable reversal of legislative policy been obtainable 
through the ballot box. It was because a large part of the 
city had no other way of asserting its principles that it resorted 
to force. ^ 

For the use of force the Assembly had furnished a pretext. 
In the past it had been advised, or more accurately, threatened, 
by extra constitutional bodies like the conventions, the town 
meetings and the Associators, and it had consented to follow 
their guidance. It needed only a continuance of the popular 
excitement and an attempt at resistance by the Assembly to 
precipitate the final conflict. The first essential was furnished 
by Paine's Common Sense and the Quaker Testimony ; the 
second was the declaration by the Assembly that it would not 
rescind its instructions against independence.^ 

The importance of " Common Sense for eighteen pence " can 
hardly be overestimated.^ First of all it removed the discus- 
sion from the plane of constitutional argument, where compara- 

1 See the article in the Post April 27 : "A poor man has rarely the honor of 
speaking to a gentleman on any tenns, and never with familiarity but for a few 
weeks before election. . . . Blessed state which brings all so nearly on a level. ' ' 
Extension of the suffrage and frequent elections were therefore considered as 
guarantees of equality. " Be free men and you will be companions for gentlemen 
annually," but to be a freeman in the full meaning of that term was no easy mat- 
ter in Philadelphia. 

«From November 7, 1775, ^"^ June, 1776, the Assembly, although repeatedly 
petitioned, refused to change its attitude on this point. On April 6, a vote to 
that effect was passed. 

3 One or two quotations may give a definite idea of the influence exerted by 
this pamphlet. A letter from Maryland in the Evening Post of February 13 said : 
" If you know the author of Common Sense tell him he has done wonders and 
worked miracles, made Tories, Whigs, and washed Blackamores white. He has 
made a great number of converts here. His stile is plain and nervous, his facts are 
true, his reasoning just and conclusive. . . • Send me two dozen of the 
second edition. Since the King's speech and the addresses of both Houses, I 
look upon the separation as taken place." 



236 The Revolutionary Movcinc?it in Pennsylvania. 

tively few understood the American position, to the plane con- 
trolled by mother wit, where almost everyone could figure as 
an intellectual giant. The effect of Paine's effort may be 
judged either from the words of Franklin, who was friendly to 
the cause of independence : " Tom Paine's Common Sense 
made a great impression in Pennsylvania,"^ or from those of 
an opponent, who called it " one of the most artful, insidious 
and pernicious pamphlets I have ever met with."^ Yet the 
importance of the pamphlet is overestimated if it be regarded 
as the cause of the uprising which followed. As the Stamp 
Act in 1765 made all Americans recognize that money would 
actually be taken from their pockets, so Common Sense 
gave to a crowd of discontented and clamorous people a 
direct statement of the object for which they were fighting. 
"It is addressed to the passions of the populace at a time 
when their passions are much inflamed," remarked the anony- 
mous writer above quoted, but unless the people had been 
ready to receive it, the call thus issued would have had little 

A letter from Philadelphia in Almon's Remembrancer [II, 31] declares that 
" Common Sense is read to all ranks ; and so many as read, so many become 
converted though perhaps the hour before they were most violent against the 
least idea of Independence" [March 12, 1776]. 

Thomas F. Gordon, in his History of Pennsylvania [p. 539], says of Paine's 
Common Sense: "This author addressed the people in a style adapted t® all 
capacities : he excited the enmity of the religious against a kingly government, 
by quotations from the Old Testament, animated the proud and the ambitious, 
by contrasting the narrow island of Great Britain and her present power with the 
broad Continent of America and its future greatness ; and satisfied all, by the 
most specious arguments of the advantages and practicability of independence." 

William Gordon, in his History of the American Revolution [II, 92], in the 
same manner remarks that no publication so greatly promoted the spirit of inde- 
pendence. " In unison with the sentiments and feelings of the people, it has 
produced the most astonishing effects and been received with vast applause, read 
by almost every American. ... It has satisfied multitudes that it is their 
true interest immediately to cut the Gordian knot by which the American colonies 
have been bound to Great Britain." 

' Franklin to Lee, Works, VI, 4, Februai-y 19, 1776. 

" The True Interest of America, etc., printed and sold by James Humphreys. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 237 

effect. Paine's ability lay in the fact that he could see which 
way public opinion was tending and could put himself at its 
head in a striking and brilliant manner. 

There were, of course, many who tried to offset this pamphlet. 
" Candidus," " Cato," "An American," " Rationalis," and other 
writers appeared in the press and in broadsides to oppose the 
tide which at once began to set strongly toward personal 
equality and colonial independence. "The scheme of inde- 
pendence is ruinous, delusive and impracticable," said " Candi- 
dus," in his pamphlet entitled Plain Truth.^ " Were the author's 
assertions respecting the power of America as real as nuga- 
tory. Reconciliation on Liberal Principles with Great Britain 
would be exalted policy, and circumstanced as we are. Per- 
manent Liberty and True Happiness can only be obtained by 
reconciliation with that Kingdom." But in the face of the 
rising tide in Paine's favor such replies were powerless. More 
and more generally it was realized that the early policy of 
non-resistance advocated by the extreme conservatives was 
the only alternative to a frank avowal of independence. The 
arguments in favor of petitions sank yet more deeply in pop- 
ular disfavor as successive appeals to the British government 
were disregarded and the illogical position of men like Dick- 
inson, who proposed peace and meanwhile acted war, was 
generally recognized. In such pamphlets as The Progress 
of an American Creed for obtaining a redress of grievances 
and bringing about a reconciliation with Great Britain, it was 
plainly hinted that such an irresolute and double attitude 

' Various names have been given as that of the author styling himself Can- 
didus, among others Allen, Galloway and William Smith, but there is no 
certainty in any case. The quotation in the text is from the full subject of the 
pamphlet, which, it may be added, was its ablest portion. 

The most effective writer against Paine was " An American," said to have been 
Charles Inglis, an Episcopalian preacher in New York. His pamphlet, The 
True Interest of America Impartially Stated in Certain Strictures on a Pamphlet 
entitled Common Sense, seems to have been printed in at least three editions — 
two of them in Philadelphia. 



238 The Revolutionary Movement in Petmsyhania. 

could lead only to submission to English demands. Nothing 
could have occurred to strengthen this opinion more effect- 
ively than the Quaker action. 

Common Sense had appeared on January 9, 1776, and was 
well on its way to a circulation of a hundred thousand copies,^ 
when, on January 20, appeared an Address of the Quaker 
Convention, not only to men of their own sect, but " To the 
People in General," enjoining " a continuance of mutual peace- 
able endeavours for effecting a reconciliation with England."' 

It declared that " The benefits, advantages and favors we 
have experienced by our dependence on, and connection 
with the King, and the Government under which we have 
enjoyed this happy .state appear to demand from us the 
greatest circumspection, care and constant endeavors to guard 
against every attempt to alter or subvert that dependence and 
connection." 

" The setting up and putting down Kings and Government 
is God's peculiar prerogative, for causes best known to himself 

' Duycknick : Cyclopedia, I, 198. Evening Post, January 9, 1776. 

The Advertisement of Common Sense was as follows : 

" This day was published and is now selling by Robert Bull in Third St (price 
two shillings) Common Sense addressed to the inhabitants of America on the fol- 
lowing interesting subjects 

I Of the Origin and Design of Government in general with concise remarks on 
the English Constitution. 
II Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession. 
Ill Thoughts on the present state of American Affairs. 
IV Of the present ability of America with some miscellaneous Reflections. 
" Man knows no master save Creating Heaven 

Or those whom Choice and common Good ordain." 

On January 25, a German edition was advertised as in the press and one month 
later (February 19), seven editions were advertised as published, price one shil- 
ling. 

2 The full title of this "Testimony" issued by the Congress of Pennsylvania 
and New Jersey was The Ancient Testimony and Principles of the People 
called Quakers renewed, with respect to the King and Government ; and touch- 
ing the Conventions now prevailing in these and other Parts of America ; 
addressed to the People in General. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 239 

and it is not our business to have any hand or contrivance 
therein." . . . 

" May we therefore, finally unite in the abhorrence of all 
such writings and measures as evidence a desire and design 
to break off the happy connection we have hitherto enjoyed 
with the kingdom of Great Britain and our just and necessary 
subordination to the King and those who are lawfully placed 
in authority under him." 

This address of the Quakers cleared the field of compro- 
mises, and the question at issue became to the common mind, 
independence or the kind of British and provincial control 
which had been experienced in recent years. In a supplement 
to Common Sense " Demophilus " thus characterized the 
moderate party : 

" Many profess themselves zealous for the libe,rties of Ame- 
rica, yet declare an abhorrence of the idea of independency 
on Great Britain. If this be not a solecism as absurd and 
irreconcileable as ever was obtruded on mankind, I know not 
the meaning of the term ! Civil Liberty never was defined in 
stricter terms than an exemption from all control without 
THE COMMUNITY, in wMch evcry qualified member has an 
equal voice r Direct replies to the Quaker testimony were 
numerous. One such addressed " To the Representatives of 
the Religious Society of the People called Quakers or to so 
many of them as were concerned in publishing a late piece 
entitled 'The Ancient Testimony'" was published by 
Bell. The writer disclaimed all intention of attacking the 
Quaker religion. That is a matter for which they are account- 
able to God alone. " This epistle," he declared, " is directed 
to you as a political body, dabbling in matters which the pro- 
fessed Quietude of your Principles instruct you not to meddle 
with. . . . The love and desire of peace is not confined 
to Quakerism, it is the natural, as well as the religious wish of 
all denominations of men. . . . Our plan is peace for- 



240 The Revolutionary Movejuent in Pennsylvania. 

ever. We are tired of contention with Britain, and can see 
no real end to it but a final separation. We act consistently, 
because for the sake of introducing an endless and uninter- 
rupted peace, we bear the evils and burthens of the present 
day. Beneath the shade of our own vines are we attacked, 
in our own homes and on our own lands is the violence com- 
mitted against us. . . . We are obliged to apply the 
sword where you have before now applied the halter. Oh 
ye partial ministers of your own acknowledged principles. 
If the bearing arms be sinful the first going to war must 
be more so by all the difference between wilful attack and 
unavoidable defence. . . . Had ye the honest soul of Bar- 
clay ^ ye would preach repentance to your king ; ye would 
warn him of eternal ruin, ye would not spend your partial 
invectives against the injured and insulted only, but like 
faithful ministers would cry aloud and spare none. Say not 
that ye are persecuted, neither endeavor to make us the 
authors of that reproach which ye are bringing upon your- 
selves ; for we testify unto all men that we do not complain 
against you because ye are Quakers, but because ye preteiid 
to be and are not Quakers. Ye have said in your testimony 
' it is not our business to have any hand or contrivance in 
the setting up and putting down kings and governments. 
This is God's peculiar prerogative but that we may live a 
peaceable and quiet life in all godliness and honesty under 
the government which God is pleased to set over us.' If 
these are really your principles, why do you not abide by 
them ? Why do you not leave that which ye call God's work 
to be managed by himself? ... If the setting up and 
putting down of Governments is God's peculiar prerogative 
he most certainly will not be robbed thereof by us. Where- 
fore the principle itself leads you to approve of everything 
which ever happened or may happen to kings as being his 

' Here the author cjuotes Barclay's address to Charles II. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 241 

work. . . . As ye refuse to be the means [of God's 
work] on one side, ye ought not to be meddlers on the other ; 
but to wait the issue in silence." Then quoting the testimony 
advising people to unite in abhorring all writing and measures 
against the lawful king, he continues : " What a slap of the 
face is here ! The men who have quietly and passively re- 
signed up the ordering, altering, and disposal of kings and 
governments into the hands of God are now recalling their 
principles and putting in for a share of the business. . . 
Sincerely wishing that the example which ye have unwisely 
set of mingling religion with poHtics may be disavowed and 
reprobated by every inhabitant of America I leave you." 

By the time that Paine had succeeded in arousing the plain 
people against England and had increased the resolution of 
their leaders, the westerners, as has been seen,* had become 
familiar with the idea of equal representation in the legislature 
by means of the convention system in New Jersey, Maryland 
and their own State, and had recognized how easily in this 
manner they could obtain control of the colony. Their griev- 
ances against the Assembly and their common indignation 
against the so-called Quaker allies of England served to 
coalesce the eastern radicals and western frontiersmen. 

In February the Philadelphia City Committee determined 
{ to force the hand of the conservatives by calling a new con- 
vention (in which, votes being by counties, the radicals would 
be in a majority) to control the colony as had the previous 
ones.^ It had been determined that this convention should 
meet on April 2, but on March 4 a letter was issued to the 
several county committees in which the Philadelphians, after 
stating some of their grievances,^ declared their reasons for 

\ • Marshall's Diary, February 28-9, p. 61. 

2 <( As the opposition given to the present measures arises chiefly from the mem- 
bers representing three interior counties who constitute a majority of the House, 
though two of them are inferior to several other of the counties which have not 
half their number of members, the proceedings of the Assembly might more 
16 



242 Tlie Revolutionary Movcviait in Pennsylvania. 

postponing the assembling of such a body. Wc have to 
inform you, said this letter, " that having passed the vote for 
holding a convention the Committee had the pleasure of a 
conference with several members of the House. And they 
found with great satisfaction that those gentlemen indulged 
themselves in the hopes that a full and equal representation 
would be obtained in consequence of petitions now before the 
Honorable House from several of the counties and that the 

properly be said to be the proceedings of those three counties than of the prov- 
ince in general ; to concert means therefore of effecting a more full and equal 
representation, the Committee thought an object worthy your immediate attention ; 
conducive to the strength and dignity of the House of Assembly ; and essentially 
necessary to the safety of this province in particular, and the united Colonies in 
general." 

"As the present unequal representation is the ground of every other complaint 
the Committee had this principally in view. There are others which are attended 
with immediate danger ; and we thought required remedy. To name them will 
be sufficient. Our military Association labors under the imperfections and injus- 
tice of the ' Rules and Articles,' though almost a year has been employed in 
forming and connecting them. 

" The providing of Arms, &c. has been first intrusted and since continued, not- 
withstanding remonstrances, to persons who have in some instances so far neglected 
their duty as that they have it yet almost to begin. 

" The military measures of the province are under the direction of a Committee 
of Safety, f?tany of the members not havine^ the authority of the people ; notwith- 
standing a power of so great importance ought not to be intrusted to others than 
their immediate representatives. " 

" The appointment of gentlemen as Delegates from this province in Congress, 
who are not of the Assembly, and the instructions given to them, by which they 
are bound to disclose every, even military movement, and are prevented from the 
free exercise of their judgments as the necessities of the time may require, appear 
unsafe as well as dishonorable, to have a direct tendency to countenance the illiberal 
insinuations of our enemy, to create jealousies and divisions among ourselves, 
and to mislead the neighboring colonies into J false opinion of the sense of this 
province." Your Committee also wished to " confer with you on the means of 
giving the aid of the back counties to the exposed parts of this province on the 
navigable waters should they be actually invaded and their trade suspended agree- 
able to your virtuous resolution at the late convention. These being provided 
for we doubt not the province would sustain its part in the present unhappy 
yet noble contest with dignity to itself and safety to the whole " [Evening Post, 
March 9, 1776]. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 243 

other matters (mentioned in the grievances) would be attended 
to." From this it is clear that equality was the real desire of 
the radicals and that the moderates wished above all things to 
prevent the reassembling of the convention, for it was felt 
that under the present excitement such a body as the con- 
vention sitting in Philadelphia, would become the nominal as 
well as the real government. Already the Assembly had 
been attacked as unrepresentative and unauthorized to speak 
for the colony. In Common Sense Paine had declared : 

** A small number of electors or a small number of repre- 
sentatives are equally dangerous, but if the number of rep- 
resentatives be not only small but unequal, the danger is 
increased. . . , The unwarrantable stretch which the 
House made in their last sitting to gain an undue authority 
over the delegates of that province (Pennsylvahia) ought to 
warn the people at large how they trust power out of their 
own hands. A set of instructions for the delegates were put 
together, which in point of sense and business would have 
dishonored a school-boy, and after being approved by a few, 
a very few, without doors, were carried in the house and there 
passed in behalf of the whole colony : whereas did the whole 
colony know with what ill will that house hath entered on some 
necessary public measures, they would not hesitate a moment 
to think them unworthy of such a trust." Now speaking as 
"Forester," he declared in reply to Provost Smith that the 
Committees were the true representatives of the colony.^ 
" Cato and I differ materially in our opinion of Committees ; 
I consider them as the only Constitutional bodies at present 
in this province. . . . They are duly elected by the people 
and faithfully do the service for which they were elected. 
The House of Assembly do business for which they were 
not elected. Their authority is unconstitutional, being self 
created." 

1 Packet, April 22. 



244 ^^-^^ Revolutionary Moz>emcfit m Pennsylvania. 

Other writers made indirect attacks on the Assembly. 
Fault should not be found with the legislature, said one of 
the critics signing himself "Apologist," ^ for it has done all 
that could be expected of such a body. Members of the 
Assembly are conscientious men, they have taken a strict 
oath to King George, and the community has no right to 
expect that they will support resistance any more than they 
are compelled to do. Although the compact between the 
king and colony has been broken by the former, and hence 
the latter has been released from its allegiance, yet conscien- 
tious men do not easily realize this. What is needed, if new 
conditions are to be adequately met, is a convention. It 
" would act more to the minds of the people," simply because 
it would not be bound by oath to Great Britain. Instead of 
finding fault, the City Committee should therefore call a conven- 
tion " to take the load off of the shoulders of the Assembly." 
Indeed this writer urged that the Assembly itself would 
summon such a body were its members not so scrupulous 
regarding their oaths. 

In the Post of March 5, " Censor" attacked the Assembly 
more openly if not more effectively. Since 1774, he main- 
tained, the Assembly, by not obeying in every detail the 
Convention of that year and by instructing the Delegates to 
Congress, had usurped the true right of the people. " I hold 
it as a firm principle in my politics that the power of legisla- 
tion can only be conferred by the society at large and that 
the freemen never intrust their representatives with the right 
of transferring it. I also hold it equally firm that the right of 
instructing lies with the constituents and them only, that the 
representatives are bound to regard them as the dictates of 
their masters and are not left at liberty to comply with them 
or reject them as they may think proper. In the summer of 
1774 Committees were fairly chosen throughout the province 

* Evening Post, February 29, 1776. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 245 

and directed by their constituents to meet in convention and 
there fix upon a mode to have the province fairly and fully 
represented in Congress. They met accordingly, and finally 
agreed that three out of their own body and four out of the 
Assembly should be Delegates. They further agreed to 
leave the final nomination of the whole to the House, little 
suspecting that the House would ever set up claims incon- 
sistent with the desires of their constituents . . . but the 
Assembly not only rejected the three recommended by the 
convention, but refused to admit the members of the conven- 
tion to hear their debates on the occasion and publicly declared 
that the request of their constituents was inconsistent with their 
privileges. . . . This principle, then avowed and since 
acted upon, is, in my opinion, more destructive of liberty than 
any claim of Great Britain, for if representatives chosen by 
ourselves and clothed with our authority are in consequence 
to hold rights inconsistent with ours, farewell to liberty ! 
They refused to nominate the men of our choice because 
they were our choice, for the very next year when we ceased 
to hold them out as our choice they nominated them." 
" Since then," he continued, " they have chosen men as Dele- 
gates and as a Committee of Safety whom the people would 
never have admitted into the Committee of Inspection. . . . 
If my memory serves me ... on the i8th of June, 1774, 
was pointed out to the freemen of this city in the clearest 
and strongest terms the danger of committing the choice of 
Delegates to the Assembly. But the eloquence of another 
prevailed, and to please one man we relinquished a right which 
will never be exercised to our advantage till we resume it. 
Our Assembly has as good a right to elect a King for us as 
to appoint one man to represent us in Congress or in the 
Committee of Safety. ... I will boldly affirm that they 
cannot retain that privilege but at the expense of our liberties." 
The force which had been rallied against the Assembly and 



246 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the dissatisfaction of the whole community with its action was 
evident from the storm of petitions which beat against it from 
its gathering in February till the meeting of the new conven- 
tion. The system of taxation must be amended so that it 
would not bear harshly upon the Associators; the rules of 
the Association must be changed so that volunteers would be 
attracted, and no person should be exempt from service merely 
because he was fifty years of age. A large part of the property 
of the community was in the hands of persons above that 
age and if they were exempt from service or compensation 
the Assembly would not be doing its duty by its constituents. 
In the matter of representation, two requests were made 
which, if granted, would have practically done away with the 
necessity for a new constitution. The suffrage was claimed 
for all Associators without regard to property qualifications and 
equitable apportionment of representatives among the several 
counties was demanded. As in the case of the agitation 
against non-combatant bodies, the Assembly tried to satisfy 
these demands by compromise, choosing a method which 
would not decrease its appearance of conservatism while it 
seemed to respond to the demands of equity. On March 8 a 
committee was chosen, of which Dickinson was chairman, and, 
in accordance with its recommendation, a measure was passed^ 
providing for seventeen additional assemblymen, four of whom 
were assigned to the city of Philadelphia. No change was 
made in the suffrage qualifications, so that the non-voting 
element in the city remained dissatisfied, especially as the pre- 
amble of the act recited that "it is essential to the good gov- 
ernment of eveiy free state that all its component parts 
should have a just and adequate share in the legislature." In 
spite of their inability to obtain voting strength from this 
section of the people, the Whigs made a close fight in the 
city, electing one of the four new assemblymen. Marshall 

' March 14, Votes, \^I, 692. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 247 

described the election as " one of the sharpest contests, yet 
peaceable, that there has been for a number of years," but he 
complained that some of the Dutch were kept from voting. 
He did not hesitate to show the activity of the Quakers in the 
contest, an activity which he considered as decidedly inconsis- 
tent with the professions of the Testimony. " I think it may 
be said with propriety that the Quakers, Papists, Church, 
Allen family, with all the proprietary party, were never so 
happily united as at this election, notwithstanding Friends' 
former protestation and declaration of never joining with that 
party since the club or knock-down election. Oh ! tell it not 
in Gath nor publish it in the streets of Askalon how the testi- 
mony is trampled upon." ^ 

In the west the Whig candidates had been generally suc- 
cessful and Paine ascribed the party defeat in Philadelphia to 
the absence of Whig voters engaged in the defence of their 
country.^ Whatever may have been the cause, the election 
demonstrated that an alliance between the frontiersmen and 
the radical party in the east was necessary to secure control 
of the colony and that this alliance must include the non- 
voters. Common jealousies, prevalent throughout the two 
sections, made such an alliance possible, and if authority could 
be obtained for a dem.onstration of pov/er, the provincial con- 

1 The vote within the city for the moderate ticket was : Howell, 941; Allen, 
923; Wilcocks, 921; Willing, 911. For the radical ticket, Clymer, 923; Kuhl, 
904 ; Owen Biddle, 903 ; Roberdeau, 890. As may be seen from the names, 
there were no extreme conservatives nominated, lest they should cause the defeat 
of the ticket. Three of the radical nominees sat in the later convention and the 
fourth, Roberdeau, was an officer in the militia. 

Throughout the west, where the suffrage requirements were more favorable, the 
strength of the Whig ticket showed the prevalent feeling. Of the thirteen mem- 
bers elected from the western counties, eight sat in the convention of July, and 
so far as I have ascertained, but one of the whole number opposed the movement 
for a new constitution. Even had the entire western vote favored the radical 
party, the conservatives, by electing three members from Philadelphia, would 
have retained a majority in the Assembly. See Marshall's Diary, May i, 1776. 

2 " Forester," Pennsylvania Journal, May 8. 



248 The Revolutionary Movement in Penjisylvania. 

vention of Maryland, which had really controlled that colony 
for two years and in which all sections were fairly treated, 
could be imitated. Already Congress had advised several 
colonies regarding their frames of government and the grant 
made by the provincial convention of 1775 to the City Com- 
mittee of Philadelphia furnished a means of summoning a new 
Assembly in Pennsylvania. The radicals therefore determined 
to place Congress in the position formerly occupied by the 
king and to obtain its aid in creating a new government, based 
on the principles of popular sovereignty and county equality. 
With this radical view the extremists in the national legisla- 
ture were in entire accord. Indeed it was felt that unless. 
Congress had the general power of direction and was supported 
loyally by the state governments, successful resistance to 
England would be impossible. " I was very solicitous last 
fall to have government set up by the people in every colony. 
When this is done — and I am inclined to think it will be soon 
— the colonies will feel their independence, the way will be 
prepared for a confederation ; and one government may be 
prepared with the consent of the whole — a distinct state com- 
posed of all the colonies with a common legislature for great 
and general purposes."^ In the Evening Post [March 5] pro- 
posals for a confederation of the united colonies were pub- 
lished, and in every way it was urged that the Americans had 
already placed themselves in the category of rebels whom 
nothing but success — possible only through union — would 
save. Wiser men desired the harmonious co-operation of the 
colonies, and especially Pennsylvania, in the movement for 
independence, and feared a loss of power in case too radical 
measures were forced upon the moderate leaders. Preferring 
support from existing Assemblies, John Adams, on May 6, 
moved in Congress " that it be recommended to the several 
assemblies and conventions of these united Colonies who have 

^ Samuel Adams, April 30, 1776. Wells, II, 395. 



The Fall of the Qtiaker Government. 249 

limited the power of their delegates in this Congress by any 
express instructions, that they repeal or suspend those instruc- 
tions for a certain time, that this Congress may have power, 
without any unnecessary obstruction or embarrassment, to 
concert, direct and order such further measures as may seem 
to them necessary for the defence and preservation, support 
and establishment of right and liberty in these colonies." 

This resolution was earnestly debated but was finally 
defeated. It was felt that the maintenance of independence 
rested rather upon a change of heart among the people 
and the erection of vigorous governments among them, 
than upon any mere alteration of votes cast by the dele- 
gates assembled in Philadelphia.^ Either by the election of 
new and representative Assemblies or by a direct vote. Con- 
gress had to secure a distinct opinion from the people on the 
question of independence. It was of little use to secure a 
change of vote from the Pennsylvania delegates unless it was 
accompanied by a change of heart among the colonial leaders.' 

However it might have been in other colonies, in Pennsyl- 
vania the existing constitution and Assembly were greatly in 
disfavor with the forces on which independence depended and. 
the Whig party in Congress was obliged to agree to radical 
measures if it would accomplish the national results which it 
desired. In the previous year Adams had declared that any 
form of government was better than none, even if all power 
was placed in the hands of a single house,^ and to the forma- 

^ Madison Papers, I, 10-12. 

^ A means of settling the question had already been proposed by a writer in the 
Evening Post of March 9. "Congress is too busy," said he, " either to dissolve 
or to take a recess in order that the opinion of its constituents may be asked on 
the question of independence. Would it not be proper for the constituents to 
declare their sentiments on this head as soon as possible ? . . . This may be 
done by the various Committees and Conventions on the continent — and only by 
them. . . . The sooner they are convened for that purpose the better." 

3 J. Adams, Works, III, 17. 



250 TJic Revolutionary Movement m Pennsylvania. 

tion of such a government in Pennsylvania he at length gave 
his aid. 

The May elections had shown that the western portion of 
the State was ready to go ahead and the Whig members 
of Congress had great faith in the directing power of men 
like Franklin, Clymer and McKean in the east. The first 
resolution presented to the national house by Adams showed 
that the advocates of independence would have welcomed an 
alliance with the moderate party in Pennsylvania had it been 
obtainable ; but this alliance was impossible. Even had the 
conservative Assembly reluctantly sanctioned the position 
toward which Congress was hastening, no statesman could 
help seeing that the elements in Pennsylv^ania on which the 
cause depended were not and would not be content with 
Quaker leadership. Harmony in the colony could not be 
expected under the old leadership while the war lasted or the 
charter continued unamended and the conflicts of the twenty 
years preceding 1776 have shown us why. Uninterrupted 
victories by the American arms could not be relied upon and 
with defeat the conservatives of the Assembly would incline 
to accept such terms of surrender as England might offer. 
This action must be prevented at any cost for the defection of 
Pennsylvania was thought to mean the triumph of Great 
Britain. 

The result of these feelings was the second motion of 
Adams on May 15. After mentioning the failure of petitions, 
the exemption of the colonies from royal protection, the use 
of mercenaries, etc., this motion continued : " Wlicrcas, it 
appears absolutely irreconcilable to reason and good con- 
science for the people of these colonies now to take the 
oaths and affirmations necessary for the support of any gov- 
ernment under the Crown of Great Britain, and it is neces- 
sary that the exercise of every kind of authority under the 
said Crown should be totally suppressed and all the power 



The Fall of the Quaker Governmettt. 251 

of government exerted under the authority of the people of 
the colonies, for the preservation of internal peace, virtue and 
good order, as well as for the defence of their lives, liberty 
and property against the hostile invasion and cruel depreda- 
tions of their enemies ; therefore, 

"Resolveel, That it be recommended to the respective Assem- 
blies and Conventions of the United Colonies, where no gov- 
ernment sufficient to the exigencies of their affairs hath been 
hitherto established, to adopt such government as shall in the 
opinions of the representatives of the people best conduce to 
the happiness and safety of their Constituents in particular and 
America in general." ^ 

This motion made provision for an appeal to the people 
which the first had not and was adopted by a vote of seven 
colonies to four. It invited the people to disregard the col- 
onial governments. So Dickinson, in 1774, had advised the 
people of Quebec, disregarding their existing government, 
to "meet together in your several towns and districts, and 
elect deputies, who, after meeting in a provincial Congress, 
may choose delegates to represent your province in the Con- 
tinental Congress." The resolution was at once published 
and the struggle was transferred from Congress to colony. 
Here the outcome seemed doubtful. Disregarding extremists 
like Pemberton or Roberdeau, both parties had able leaders. 
Dickinson, James Wilson and Robert Morris still argued for 
the retention of the colonial charter and the formation of a 
new national government before abandoning the English con- 
nection,'^ On the other side were Franklin, Rush and McKean, 
whose high character, in the words of a nineteenth century 
opponent of the radical movement, alone prevented their 
cause falling into discredit.'^ The moderates were weaker 

'Journals of Congress, May 15, 1776. 
^John Adams, Works, II, 491. 
3 Stille : Dickinson, 184. 



\ 



252 The Revolutionary Movement in Pen7isylva7tia, 

than they seemed. It was idle to assert that the constitution 
could be changed only bv the votes of six-sevenths of the 
Assembly (the charter provision) when that body had 
repeatedly violated the constitution by a mere majority vote. 
It was useless for Dickinson to urge reconciliation when in 
Congress, according to his own statement, " after the rejection 
of the last petition to the King not a syllable, to my recol- 
lection, was ever uttered in favor of reconciliation with Great 
Britain." ^ And it was worse than useless to urge upon the 
people of Pennsylvania the guidance of an Assembly which a 
large part of the colony disliked and from which reforms had 
been obtained only by threats.^ 

It might be argued that changes in the charter could be 
secured by a vote of six-sevenths of the Assembly,^ but what 
probability of such action existed while the present suffrage 
requirements continued ? An aristocracy w^as in power now, 
and this aristocracy was one of the chief objects of attack. 
" Do not mechanicks and farmers constitute 99 out of 100 of 
the people of America ? If these by their occupations are to 
be excluded from having any share in the choice of their 
rulers or forms of government would it not be best to 
acknowledge at once the jurisdiction of the British Parlia- 
ment, which is composed entirely of gentlemen ! Is not 
one-half of the Property in the City of Philadelphia owned 
by men who wear Leather Aprons ? Does not the other half 

' Stille, p. 192. 

-On the refusal of the Assembly in April (6th) to rescind its instructions to the 
colonial delegates in Congress, Elbridge Gerry wrote to James Warren: "In this 
colony the spirit of the people is great, if a judgment is to be formed by appear- 
ances. They are well convinced of the injury their Assembly has done to the 
Continent by their instructions to their delegates." 

" Our moderate gentlemen are coming over to us. . . . It appears to me 
that the eyes of every unbeliever are now open; that all are sensible of the perfidy 
of Great Britain and are convinced there is no medium between unqualified sub- 
mission and actual independency " [Austin's Gerry, I, 179]. 

3 "Cato" in Gazette of March 13; " Civis" in Gazette of May I. 



The Fall of ihc Quaker Government. 253 

belong to men whose fathers or grandfathers wore Leather 
Aprons?"^ Indeed, it was argued that the Assembly by- 
increasing the number of its members had recognized the 
principle of true representation, while it had not carried that 
principle to its logical conclusion." The reason a change was 
opposed was that under the new regime " power and influence 
would have to be derived from the confidence of the people." ^ 
In one of two ways the Assembly might have retained its 
power, by an alliance with Congress or by putting itself unre- 
servedly on the side of the masses in the colony. By doing 
neither it excited suspicions among all parties and compelled 
an alliance which one at least, of its opponents did not desire. 
On the same day ^ that the resolution of Adams recom- 
mending the adoption of new governments by the colonies 
was adopted by Congress an attack on the Pennsylvania Con- 
stitution appeared in the Gazette, which hitherto had main- 
tained a more moderate attitude. It was signed by " An 
Elector," and asserted that there never had been in the 
colony that balance of power which Montesquieu had shown 
to be the true protection against injustice. Because of its 
tyranny, citizens had been willing to overthrow the proprie- 
tary government in the past, and they should now be equally 
willing to overthrow the dominant aristocracy. It was time 

1 Post, March 14. 

* " The requirement of fifty pounds for voting seems peculiar to this City 
alone" . . . whereas in England ** burgesses were elected by every resident 
inhabitant who paid his scot and bore his lot. This I will affirm is the ancient 
free constitution which every honest man will venture his blood to restore." 

" It is easy to judge whence the proposal for a more equal representation at 
last came. It was concluded that this manoeuvre would have a tendency to quiet 
the people by taking one of the most unanswerable objections to the present 
administration out of their mouths. You cannot, however, forget that this partial 
redress was a very late one and only conceded to prevent radical reformation." 
Packet, April 29; see also the answer to this writer in the Gazette of May i, 
and his rejoinder in the issue of May 15. 

3 Post, February 21. 

*May 15. 



254 '^^^^ Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the plain people, whose rights had thus far been unrecognized, 
should assert themselves and demand that all men paying 
taxes should have the right of suffrage. The Post of the 
next day outlined the true foundation on which a new govern- 
ment should rest. There should be an Assembly, easily 
called to account by the people and never able to form dis- 
tinct interests of its own. " Nothing but atheism or open 
immorality should exclude any man from office." In the 
same manner the Packet ' declared that "in the present disso- 
lution of the civil government in this province political power 
reverts to its first origin, the People ; that is, to every indi- 
vidual inhabitant of this colony capable of managing his own 
affairs. . . . It is from conventions of convenient num- 
bers of such freemen that the first delegation of civil power 
can be had," declared the Packet, and arrangements had 
already been made to set this comparatively simple machine 
in operation. 

On May i6, "a number of persons" determined to protest 
against the present Assembly's doing any business until the 
sense of the Province was taken in the Convention to be 
called.'^ On May i8 the City Committee, at the request of 
these persons, agreed to call a general gathering of the 
inhabitants of the City and Liberties for May 20, — the day to 
which the Assembly had adjourned, — when the proposals for 
a Convention could be considered. This meeting was accord- 
ingly held in the State House yard, and was attended — accord- 
ing to one estimate — by seven thousand persons.^ It was sig- 
nificant of the spirit of the gathering that Daniel Roberdeau, 
one of the most radical Whigs, a defeated candidate at the recent 
colonial election and an officer of the Association, was selected 
as chairman. The meeting, after hearing with applause the 

^ May 20. 

2 Marshall's Diary. 

3 Post, May 21. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government 255 

Congressional resolutions of May 1 5, and in silence the instruc- 
tions given by the colonial Assembly to the provincial delegates 
in Congress, resolved : "That the present Assembly not hav- 
ing been elected for the purpose of forming a new govern- 
ment can not proceed therein without assuming arbitrary 
power; That a protest be immediately entered by the people 
of the City and County of Philadelphia against the power of the 
House to carry into execution the resolve of Congress ; That a 
Provincial Assembly elected by the people be chosen for that 
purpose ; That the present government of the province is not 
competent to the exigencies of its affairs ; and that the meeting 
will abide- by these resolutions be the consequences what they 
may." ^ 

These resolutions were outspoken but the gathering went 
further. It announced: "As we mean not to enter into 
any altercation with the House we shall forbear enumera- 
ting the particular inconsistencies of its former conduct and 
content ourselves with declaring that as a body of men 
bound by oaths of allegiance to our enemy and influ- 
enced, as many of its members are, by connections with 
a pecuniary employment under the proprietary, we have very 
alarming apprehensions that a government modeled by them 
would be the means of subjecting us and our posterity to 
greater grievances than any we have hitherto experienced." It 
was also asserted that the Assembly was elected by men in 
real or supposed allegiance to the King, " to the exclusion of 
many worthy inhabitants whom the aforesaid resolve of Con- 
gress hath now rendered electors." 

With the passage of these resolutions the crisis was reached. 
In a " letter to the public in all parts of the province " the Post- 
declared that the issue was union of the colonies versus the 

iFor an account of the meeting see Gazette, May 22 ; Post, May 21 ; Gordon. 
Hist, of Pa., p. 526. 
2 May 21. 



256 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

rule of the Assembly. " We have declared for the former 
and we will support it. . . . We have been open in our 
affairs and we protest against private machinations. Let the 
men come forward who are endeavoring privately to under- 
mine the Union. We dare them to do it." The last words 
of this appeal referred to a reactionary protest which had 
been framed with the intention of offsetting the radical action 
of the town meeting. It was drawn up by the moderates of 
the city and was, in Marshall's words, " carried by numbers, 
two and two, into almost all parts of the town to be signed 
by all 'tag, long tail and body,' and also sent into the coun- 
try and much promoted by the Quakers." ^ The County 
Committee also issued a protest, in which it urged the 
Assembly to stand firm in its former position.^ 

Thus when the Assembly, on May 22, secured a quorum, 
both radical and conservative petitions were presented to 
it.^ On the one hand "the Protest of divers of the Inhabi- 
tants of this Province in behalf of themselves and others " 
called for a new constitution and government, and gave 
notice that the City Committee would be requested to take 
steps towards calling a convention for this purpose. On 

' This protest or remonstrance may be found in full in the Votes of Assembly, 
VI, 731, or in the Gazette of May 22. Its chief points are : 

(i) Congress did not mean by its resolutions of the fifteenth to interfere in 
international affairs. The representatives of the people are the best judges 
whetlier or not a proper government is in existence in Pennsylvania, and experience 
has shown that the existing authority is beneficial to the province. 

(2) The overthrow of the Charter will excite a spirit of disunion with the other 
Colonies, alienate many, and, as has been shown in Connecticut and Rhode 
Island, is unnecessary. 

(3) The authority of the people vested in the Assembly can accomplish any 
temporary change of form which may be necessary. 

(4) The only oljject to be sought is "an accommodation of the unhappy differ- 
ences with Great Britain, an event which, though traduced and treated as rebels, 
we still profess earnestly to desire." 

' Post, May 23. 

3Votes, VI, 726, 728, 729, 730, 731, 735. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 257 

the other, the County Committee of Philadelphia asked that 
no change from the existing status should be made. A peti- 
tion from Cumberland County took a middle ground by 
requesting the withdrawal of the instructions given the Con- 
gressional delegates. The House at once^ appointed a com- 
mittee of five to consider the first protest. A majority of this 
committee was selected from those Assemblymen who were 
fresh from their constituents, but they were the conservatives 
chosen in Philadelphia. With them were two of the old 
members, one from Lancaster the other from Chester, so that 
no radical section of the House was represented on the Com- 
mittee. To offset this a second committee was appointed on 
May 24,^ to frame resolutions doing away with the naturaliza- 
tion laws and the oaths or affirmations of allegiance in the 
colony. No intimation was given of any intention to rescind 
the instructions of November or to lower the suffrage require- 
ments. 

The first named committee, on May 24, reported to the 
Assembly a draft for the memorial to Congress, and it was 
" referred to further consideration," after which no trace of it 
is found. Its contents may be inferred from the address which 
the City Committee sent to Congress as an answer " to any 
Remonstrance that was or is intended to be sent from the 
Assembly." It differed little, if at all, from the "Address of 
the County Committee " ^ framed by the same party ; which 
represented the Assembly as the only body legally com- 
petent to speak for the colony, and asked for such measures as 
would finally secure reconciliation on a constitutional basis. ^ 

1 Votes, VI, 727. 

2 Votes, VI, 729. 
sPost, May 21. 

*The Address of the City Committee — (Even. Post, May 25 ; Votes, VI, 730 ; 
Journals of Cong., May 25) — declared that in compliance with a meeting of a 
"majority" of the inhabitants of Philadelphia they had issued an appeal for a 
conference ( " by virtue of a power given them by a Provincial Convention held 
in Philadelphia Jan., 1775 ") of the Committees of the Counties to pass upon the 
17 



258 TJic Rcvolutioyiary Moncmcnt in Pennsylvania. 

Whatever might have resulted from these petitions the 
logic of events was displacing the Assembly from its position 
of control more surely than any words of protestation could 
do. The war had decreased the trade of the colony, and 
such articles of consumption as the people usually imported 
were rapidly becoming scarce. Even had none of the exist- 
ing store been laid away for future profit, as was claimed, the 
shutting off of trade and the diminution in specie would have 
led to a scarcity of goods, a depreciation of the Continental 
currency and a rise in prices. With the decreased purchasing 
power of the people, and the scarcity and higher prices of 
foreign merchandise, dissatisfaction rapidly increased and the 
provincial government was held responsible. " Has the 
Assembly prevented the monopolizing of the necessaries of 
life ? . . . When I look at the men who have been fore- 
most in this mischief I am ready to conclude that they are 
actuated by more than a speculative profit on the articles they 
have and are now engrossing. . . . They are emissaries 
of North, Howe and Dunmore, and I doubt not this was one 
among many other reasons for calling a convention." ^ 

question of a convention. Their reasons were that the Assembly "does nut con- 
tain a full and equal representation of the provinces," "that it is composed of 
men who hold offices under the crown of Britain ;" " that they have disputed 
(sic) the power which was deputed solely to them, to persons who had not the 
sanction of the voice of the people for legislative purposes ; and that we have 
reason to believe that they have been dragged into a compliance with most of the 
resolutions of Congress from a fear of a Provincial Convention." The petitioners 
declare that the remonstrance of the Assembly is founded on one " obtained by 
indefatigable industry and unfair representations." They solemnly assert that 
"they have no design or wish to alter those parts of the charter or laws of the 
province which secure to every man the enjoyment of his property, liberty and 
the sacred rights of conscience. They wish only to see alterations made in such 
of them as relate to representation <•»■ the province and such as render the consent 
of the king and his governor necessary to give efficacy to our laws." "The situa- 
tion of our province . . . requires vigor and harmony in the direction of both 
civil and military affairs, but these can never be obtained when a people no longer 
confide in their rulers." The address was signed by Thomas McKean, Chm. 
^Post, March 7. 



The Fall of the Quaker Government. 259 

*' Though the Committee of Inspection can not be accused of 
entire inattention to the public safety in the late villainous 
attempt made to injure us by a set of monopolists I cannot 
think the sore has yet been probed to the bottom." ^ " Oblige 
the monopoHzers to sell at the prices you set and we will sup- 
port you," said the tradesmen in an open letter to the City 
Committee and they expressed grave dissatisfaction with the 
course pursued by Assembly.* On the one hand the Assem- 
bly was petitioned to issue more colonial bills of credit; on 
the other, it was accused of not keeping prices down and in 
no way could all complaints be satisfied.^ 

Meanwhile the other colonies, acting under the advice of 
Congress, were rapidly moving towards that formal declara- 
tion which the Pennsylvania Assembly would not authorize. 
Massachusetts had set up an independent government as early 
as 1775, and in January, 1776, had made it " perpetual." 
New Hampshire, although willing to return to allegiance li 
her demands were satisfied, had thought better terms could 
be obtained by a declaration of independence, and had prac- 
tically established a republican constitution in January, and in 
March, South Carolina had declared that " the consent of the 
people is the origin, and their happiness is the end of gov- 
ernment." Maryland was conducting her affairs by a conven- 
tion which was to pass on the relations between the colony 

1 Gazette, March 13. 

2 Post, April 4. 

3 The City Committee decided that : "The several District Committees having 
returned their reports relating to the engrossing of Salt, Rum, Sugar, &c., 
it clearly appears that the scarcity of those articles is artificial and that several 
persons whose names are returned to this committee . . . have formed a cruel 
design to add to the distresses of their suffering fellow-citizens and country 
by collecting great quantities of and exacting exorbitant prices for the above 
articles." The committee then proceeded to fix a price for such articles, and 
declared that if anyone exceeded these it would " expose such persons, by name, 
to public view as sordid vultures who are preying on the vitals of their country 
in a time of general distress." — Post, March 7. 



26o TJic Rcvoltitionary Mcroement m Pennsylvania. 

and Great Britain, and on May 28, the Post printed the reso- 
lutions favoring independence adopted by the Virginia Con- 
vention seventeen days before.^ 

News of these changes had been expected,^ and with the 
reports of their actual occurrence leaders of opinion began to 
shift their positions. Some of the moderates, of whom Joseph 
Reed was an example, abandoned their efforts for reconcil- 
iation and the retention of the old constitution, and sought 
rather to guide the new movement. On June 4 Congress 
dealt another blow to the Legislature of Pennsylvania by 
providing that certain military appointments should be 
made by "the Colony" instead of "by the Assembly or 
Convention," the form which it had heretofore used.^ 
The next day the Virginia resolutions were read in the 
Assembly, and, awakening at last to the necessities of the 
situation, the house, in spite of several petitions, " appointed, 
by a large majority," a committee to bring in new instruc- 
tions to the delegates in Congress. * This committee^ 
reported in favor of a change ; by a vote of 3 1 to 12 the 
change was approved, and, as appears from the records for 
June 14, the delegates were authorized " to concur in forming 
such further compacts between the United Colonies, concluding 
such treaties with the foreign kingdoms and states, and in 
adopting such other measures as shall be judged necessary 
reserving to the people of this colony the sole and 

' ' ' Forasmuch ' ' as representations and petitions have thus far produced only 
increased tyranny, etc., " WHierefore, appealing to the Searclifr of Hearts for the 
Sincerity of the former declarations expressing our desire to preserve the con- 
nexion with that nation," . . . "j?^.w/7Vrt', That the Delegates appointed to repre- 
sent this Colony in General Congress be instructed to propose to that respectable 
body TO DECLARE THE UNITED COLONIES FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES at 
such time and in the manner as to them shall seem best." 

^ Post, May 1 1 . 

3 Journals, June 4. 

♦Votes, VI, 736. 

^ Dickinson, Morris, Reed, Clymer, Wilcocks, Pearson and Smith. 



Tlic Fall of the Quaker Government. 261 

exclusive right of regulating their internal government." * 
Meanwhile, on June 7, Lee had moved his resolution for inde- 
pendence in Congress, and on June 10 the Association in and V 
around Philadelphia had voted overwhelmingly in favor of the 
same measure.* 

The debate in Congress on Lee's resolution throws some 
interesting light on Pennsylvania politics at the time. If 
Jefferson's account maybe trusted Mt would seem that the 
middle party in that colony had become converted to the doc- 
trine of independence accompanied by a plan for a new gov- 
ernment for the colonies and only awaited the excuse which a 
declaration from the Assembly or from a Provincial Convention 
would give them to announce their new policy. According 
to Jefferson, "Wilson, Robert R. Livingston, E. Rutledge, 
Dickinson and others " argued " that the people, of the middle 
colonies were not yet ripe for bidding adieu to British connec- 
tion ; but that they were fast ripening, and in a short time 
would join the general voice of America." Soon the Assem- 
bly or Convention would declare on the subject, but, "if a 
declaration should now be agreed to (by Congress), these dele- 
gates (from the Middle States) must retire and possibly their 
colonies might secede from the Union." From this it is evi- 
dent either that these speakers were threatening the Congress 
in order to defeat the proposal of Lee and Adams or that 
hasty Congressional action might throw the Pennsylvania 
Assembly into an alliance with Great Britain for putting down 
the new movement.^ 

1 Votes, VI, 740. 

2 Evening Post, June 1 1 . 
'Madison Papers, I, 10-12. 

^ The charge that the Assembly and its reactionary constituents would be will- 
ing to secede from the majority in Congress was not confined to the members of 
the latter body. It is found in the press where the assertion was made that it was 
not the Charter of the Colony but their own power, which conservatives were seek- 
ing to preserve. By acting without the consent of either king or governor the 



262 The Revohitio7iavy Movcmc7it in Patnsylvania. 

Such a secession for the purpose of retaining control 
of their respective colonies even at the cost of submis- 
sion to England did not seem so grave a danger to the 
Whig delegates in Congress as may have been anticipated. 
The unpopularity of the Conservative Assembly in Pennsyl- 
vania was well known, and it was felt that as the middle 
colonies had been persuaded to follow radical leadership thus 
far, a like decision could be relied upon for the future. In reply 
to the suggestion of the conservatives the history of the Dutch 
Republic was cited to prove that the secession of some col- 
onies could not be so dangerous as has been apprehended.^ 
"No delegate," it was urged, "can be denied or even want a 
power of declaring an existing truth." In the effort to con- 
vince the doubters that nothing more was asked of them than 
a mere statement of fact, the arguments which Dickinson had 
used in his Farmer's Letters, and which John Adams had 
advanced at the outset of the struggle ^ were again presented. 
" As to the Parliament of England we had always been inde- 
pendent. Its restraints on our trade derived efficacy from 
our acquiescence only and not from any right it possessed of 
imposing them, and that so far, our connection had been 
federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of 
hostilities. . . . That, as to the king, we had been bound 
to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved 
by his assent to the late Act of Parliament by which he 
declares us out of his protection and by his levying war upon 
us." Turning from theoretical argument to that conception 
of history which Locke had made the very foundation of Ameri- 

Assembly have already destroyed our Charter, said a Continental Farmer, 
"and now, when they have left us nothing but its ashes, a faction starts up and 
cries 'Our Charter, Our Charter.' Be not deceived, my dear countrymen, they 
mean nothing by that word but a Separation from the Congress, and, of course, 
submission to Great Britain." — Packet, June 3, 1776. 

* Madison Papers, I, 15. 

2 Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1765 ; Works, III, 462. 



The Fall of the Quaker Govertiment. 263 

can politics, the case of James II. was cited. That monarch 
had never formally declared the English people out of his pro- 
tection as King George had done ; " yet his actions proved it 
and the Parliament declared it." ^ The existing case was no 
different. 

This debate made it clear to the delegates from the middle 
colonies that their colleagues had determined upon indepen- 
dence ; that if the colonial Assemblies would not join them 
trust would be placed in conventions, and that should this 
resource also fail they would, unaided, defend what their 
political judgment told them were their constitutional rights. 
If the Congress had broken on this question one party or the 
other would have undoubtedly "seceded" or deserted their 
fellows, but the question which group would have done so 
depends for its answer on the interpretation of American his- 
tory before that date. But the union was not broken. So 
far as the action of Pennsylvania was essential to the Declara- 
tion of Independence the credit belongs to her statesmen of 
the middle party who were either convinced by the logic of 
their own arguments now repeated to them, or were influenced 
by their devotion to the American cause. They resisted the 
Whig program no longer. In the Congressional vote on 
Lee's resolution, taken June 8, Pennsylvania had voted five 
to two against independence.^ On July 2, the vote was three 
to two in the affirmative.^ 

It would have been fortunate if the supporters of the con- 
servative delegates could have accepted the Whig cause and 
could have supported the inevitable demands for independence 
as heartily as did the wisest of their leaders in Congress. 
Dickinson and Morris were of great service to the United 

'Madison Papers, I, 13. 

2 Dickinson, Morris, Humphreys, Willing and Wilson vs. Franklin and Morton. 
> Franklin, Morton and Wilson vs. Humphreys and Willing. Dickinson and 
Morris absented themselves that this result might be accomplished. 



264 The Revolutionary Moz'enient in Pcnjisylvania. 

Colonies, and had their former supporters taken the same 
attitude as did these men it might have been possible even 
then for Pennsylvania to have retained the influence in the 
confederation to which her population and wealth naturally 
entitled her. The Assembly, however, changed its position 
only under compulsion, and it is doubtful if the mass of its 
constituents in the eastern counties changed at all. To the 
last they were urging the conservatives not to yield, and as 
was but natural they were overwhelmed by the new and more 
radical convention. In consequence the state was divided in 
its own counsels and weak in the National Congress. 

Even before the decision in Congress or the change of 
instructions by the Assembly, the City Committee had been 
preparing for a new government. It forwarded to the vari- 
ous county committees the resolutions adopted by the town- 
meeting on May 20, and invited a provincial conference to 
meet at Philadelphia. On June 4, the Committee requested 
the justices of the Court of Common Pleas and Quarter 
Sessions to hold no further sessions until a new government 
had been established.^ In explanation of the change of 
heart in the Assembly, Watchman reminded " The Com- 
mon People " that the Tories have always lagged one step 
behind the Whigs and have ever taken up one mode of resist- 
ance after the Whig has dropped it. If the Whigs go straight 
ahead, perhaps some of the Tories, who pretend to be so 
much better and richer, but whose ancestors were not known, 
will follow in time.'^ The letter which was sent through the 
west by the City Committee^ urged that the interests 
of that section would be much better cared for under the new 

' Gordon, Hist, of Penna., 529. See also the accounts of the reception accorded 
to the missionaries of the new cause throughout the west. — Post, June 4 ; Gazette, 
June 12. 

■^ Packet, June 10. See also the arguments put in the mouths of the " Halters" 
in the Post, June i. 

3 Post, June 13. 



The Fall of the Qttaker Government. 265 

government than under the old, and the response seems to 
have been hearty. The Whig delegates in the Assembly- 
abandoned that body after the vote of June 8, leaving it with- 
out a quorum, and after several unsuccessful efforts to obtain 
a working house the old legislature adjourned until August.^ 
When the Conference met on June 18 it at once assumed 
control of the province and the old orgnization never regained 
its former authority. 
1 Votes, VI, 743. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 



Authorities. 

Proceedings relative to the calling of the Conventions of 1776 and 1790. 
Harrisburg, 1825. 

Journals of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl- 
vania, 1776, Nov. 28-1781, Oct. 2, with the Proceedings of the several Com- 
mittees and Conventions before and at the commencement of the American 
Revolution. Philadelphia, 1782. [Michael Hillegas, Editor.] 

The Diary of James Allen. [Pennsylvania Mag. of Hist. & Biog. IX, 188.] 

The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. [Poore, Charters and Constitutions.] 

Reed, William B. Life of Joseph Reed. 

Ford, Paul Leicester. The Adoption of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. 
[Pol. Sci. Quar. X, 426.] 

Wharton, Anna H. Thomas WTiarton, First Governor of Pennsylvania. 
[Penna. Mag. of Hist. & Biog. V, 426 ; VI, 91.] 

The record of the first meeting of the Provincial Conference 
in Pennsylvania and of the formal organization of the revolu- 
tionary government is as follows : " This day a number of 
gentlemen met at Carpenters' Hall in Philadelphia being 
deputed by the committees of several of the counties of this 
province, to join in a Provincial Conference in consequence of 
a circular letter from the committee of the City and Liberties 
of Philadelphia inclosing the resolution of the Continental 
Congress of the fifteenth of May last." ^ 

The Conference was composed of 108 members and 
organized by electing Thomas McKean president. In accord- 
ance with the precedent established by the Convention, and 
in recognition of the claims of its western supporters, the 
new Assembly voted that in its deliberations the several coun- 
ties and the City of Philadelphia should each have one vote. 
The resolutions passed by the Conference express not only 

' Proceedings relative to the calling of the Convention, I, 35, June 18. The 
members are given in Proceed., I, 35-36, and in Journals I, 34-35. 

(266) 



The Neiv Govermncjit Asstimcs Legal Form. 267 

the dissatisfaction with the old Provincial Assembly prevalent 
among certain classes of the people, but are indicative also 
of the sources upon which the new movement relied for 
support. On June 19, it was "resolved unanimously that 
the resolution of Congress of May 15, is fully approved by 
this Conference ; that the present government of this province 
is not competent to the exigencies of our affairs ; " and " that 
it is necessary that a Provincial Convention be called by this 
conference for the express purpose of forming a new gov- 
ernment in this province on the authority of the people only." ^ 
Having declared in this manner the necessity of a new 
regime, the Conference proceeded to establish it. As there 
was no reason to follow the practice of the previous Assem- 
blies in restricting political power to a few or to a particular 
section, the Conference reverted to early colonial precedent. 
It took the county for its basis of representation and the free- 
man for its unit of suffrage. Like the old Assembly the Con- 
ference reserved control of internal affairs to the colonial 
government although professing its willingness to support the 
general Congress in all national concerns.^ On the nineteenth, 
a petition was received from the German militia of Philadel- 
phia, praying that all taxable Associators should have a vote 
for members of the Convention and a share in the govern- 
ment of the state. By granting this petition the Conference 
saw an opportunity to secure for the new movement the sup- 
port of a large element in the colony which had long desired 
the franchise and which had felt the injustice of being deprived 
of a voice in provincial affairs, and the petition received imme- 
diate attention. On the following day the Conference resolved 
that every Associator twenty-one years of age, who had resided 
one year in the colony, and had been assessed for provincial 
or county taxes, should have the franchise. 

•Proceed., I, 38. 
2 Proceed., I, 40-47. 



268 TJic Revobitio7iary Movcuicnt in Pennsylvania. 

Having thus provided for an increase in their own party 
the new rulers passed other suffrage requirements which 
served to decrease the ranks of their opponents. No person 
who had been pubhshed by a Committee of Inspection or 
Safety as an enemy to the hberties of America was allowed 
to vote unless he had " been restored to the favor of his coun- 
try," and persons now qualilied to elect members of the 
Assembly must take, when required, the following oath or 

affirmation : "I, A B , do declare that I do not hold 

myself bound to bear allegiance to George III, and that I 
will not by any means directly or indirectly oppose the estab- 
lishment of a free government in this province by the Con- 
vention now to be chosen, nor the measures adopted by the 
Congress against the tyranny attempted to be established in 
these colonies by the court of Great Britain." ' 

In addition to taking this oath each person wishing to be 
eligible to membership in the Convention must also agree to 
" steadily and firmly at all times promote the most effectual 
means, according to the best of his skill and knowledge, to 
oppose the tyrannical proceedings of king and parliament, 
and to establish and support a government in this province 
on the authority of the people alone." He must declare his 
belief in the doctrine of the Trinity and in the divine inspira- 
tion of the Scriptures, and his will to "oppose any measure 
that shall or may in the least interfere with or obstruct the 
religious principles or practices of any of the good people of 
this province." ^ These declarations in favor of national 
independence and local equality completed the political plat- 
form upon which the Conference appealed to the people of 
Pennsylvania. Having summoned a Convention to meet on 
the fifteenth of the following month the Conference, on June 
25, finally adjourned.^ 

' Proceed., I, 38-39. 
'■^ Proceed., I, 39. 



The Nczv Govertiment Assumes Legal Form. 269 

In judging the work and position of this Conference the 
premises adopted are of prime importance. In its relations to 
the old order it can be regarded only as a revolutionary body, 
but if the Continental Congress was the beginning of a new na- 
tional government, and if the Convention and Committee sys- 
tem of the state be recognized as a reorganization of the com- 
munity, then the Conference followed in logical sequence. As 
the old Assembly granted the suffrage only to those who would 
support its authority, so the new agent of government exercised 
a like discretion. The committees throughout the state had 
been the real authorities in their several communities for some 
time. They had derived their power from the people and 
handed it on to the Conference. The foundation of the new 
regime was the popular will and the Conference occupied 

iThe Conference issued the following address to the people of the colony 
regarding to the Convention. It was framed by Rush, McKean, Hill and J. B. 
Smith : " Friends and Countrymen. — In obedience to the power we derived 
from you we have fixed upon a mode of electing a convention to form a govern- 
ment for the province of Pennsylvania under the authority of the people. Divine 
Providence is about to grant you a favor which few people have ever enjoyed 
before, the privilege of choosing deputies to form a government under which you 
are to live. ... It becomes you, therefore, to choose such persons only, to 
act for you in the ensuing convention, as are distinguished for wisdom, integrity 
and a firm attachment to the liberties of this province as well as to the liberties 
of the united colonies in general. In order that your deputies may know your 
sentiments as fully as possible upon the subject of government, we beg that you 
would convey to them your wishes and opinions upon that head immediately after 
their election. . . . We beg that you would endeavor to remove the pre- 
judices of the weak and ignorant respecting the proposed change in our govern- 
ment, and assure them that it is absolutely necessary to secure property, liberty and 
the sacred rights of conscience to every individual in the province." — [Proceed., 
I, 41.] The Conference provided that the inspectors of election who were to 
officiate at the polls should be chosen on July 6. According to Marshall the 
leaders of the Conference desired that the men chosen to the Convention should 
be "of great learning, knowledge of our history, of law and of mathematics and a 
perfect acquaintance with the laws, manners, trade, constitution and politics of all 
nations, men of independent fortunes, steady in their integrity, zeal and upright- 
ness to the determination and result of Congress in their opposition to the tyranny 
of Great Britain." 



2/0 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pettnsylvania. 

the same position in the state that the Congress held in the 
nation. 

In so far as its relations to the English state were con- 
cerned the Conference was little if any more illegal than the 
old Assembly. While the colonial legislature yet maintained 
the form of allegiance, it had been guilty of treason by sup- 
porting troops engaged in offensive war against the king, and 
had been declared out of the royal protection. Under such 
circumstances as these the question at once arises, into whose 
hands did the legal sovereignty of Pennsylvania fall ? All 
parties had violated the professed constitution of the state 
and legal authority reverted to the king. By the constitu- 
tional theory accepted in America the compact between king 
and colony had been dissolved and the people, as in 1682, 
were free to frame a new government. A fraction of the old 
legislature was sitting in the Assembly chamber. It stood 
for the principle of state sovereignty and had an undoubted 
right to carry on the government as long as it could obtain the 
consent of the people. On the other hand the new power 
professed to obtain its reason for existence from the resolu- 
tion of Congress upheld by the will of the community. It 
therefore stood on the foundation of a popular acquiescence 
in a new national sovereignty. It was for the people of 
Pennsylvania to choose between the two authorities and the 
body obtaining their favor thereby became the legal sovereign 
of the state. The local revolution had been accomplished 
when the Committee organization assumed control of the state. 

Many of the people of the state realized that the basis of 
government had changed and urged the old Assembly to 
accommodate itself to the new conditions. This was the 
view taken by the Cumberland County petition of May 28.^ 
" The arbitrary and unconstitutional claim of the British Par- 
liament to bind, by its acts, the British colonies in all cases 

'Votes, VI, 730. 



TJie Neiv Goveniment Assumes Legal Form. 271 

whatsoever, and the cruel exertions of the British Administra- 
tion to carry, by force, that claim into execution, drove 
America into the present unhappy, but on her part, just and 
necessary war. To obtain the re-establishment of their rights 
and to be restored to the Freedom and Prosperity, which 
until lately, they enjoyed, were the declared ends of the 
colonists ; of these ends we ardently wish to see the full 
accomplishment. But this cannot take place without the 
concurrence of those who discover in Parliament no inclina- 
tion to depart from the destructive system which they have so 
pertinaciously pursued. Necessity therefore directs the con- 
templation of the public to these objects. 

" If those who rule in Britain will not permit the colonists to 
be free and happy, in connexion with that kingdom, it becomes 
their duty to secure and promote their freedom and happiness, 
in the best manner they can, without that connexion. 

" The prosecution of the war may require some measures to 
be adopted, which beside the purposes more immediately 
intended to be produced by them, may have a tendency to 
weaken or dissolve the connexion before mentioned. To 
avoid the terrible consequences of Anarchy, to prevent the 
best men falling sacrifices to the factious and interested views 
of the worst, it will soon become, if it has not already become 
necessary to advise and to form such establishments as will 
be sufficient to protect the virtuous and restrain the vicious 
members of society ; these establishments may be construed 
to lead to a separation from Great Britain. The foregoing 
considerations induce us to petition this honorable house, that 
the last instructions which it gave to the delegates of this 
province in Congress wherein they are enjoined not to consent to 
any step which may cause or lead to a separation from Great 
Britain may be withdrawn." 

In this petition was outlined a policy which would have 
continued the old government in the colony and which, if 



272 Tin- Revolutionary Moi'emc7it in Pennsylvania. 

honestly followed in May, would have done much to have 
restored the Assembly to its former position. On the day suc- 
ceeding its presentation ^ the Assembly, as has been noted, 
had been presented with a petition from " the Inhabitants of 
the City and County of Philadelphia," which was intended to 
offset the radical measures proposed by the town meeting of 
the previous week. The conservative signers of these peti- 
tions recognized that something must be done by the Assem- 
bly if it was to retain its power, and they recommended to 
the Legislature the example of South Carolina." 

The example offered was a moderate one, but the Assem- 
bly, seemingly bent on its own destruction, would profit by 
nothing. In the southern colony it was recognized that for 
the time being certainly, the authority of the king was gone. 
A new constitution was therefore framed in accordance with 
the advice of the Continental Congress, which should be the 
regulating force in the colony " until an accommodation of 
the unhappy differences between Great Britain and America." 
The preamble declared the American grievances and the body 
o{ the document replaced royal with colonial officials, thus 
forming a framework of government which, in the language 
of the Cumberland petitioners, prevented anarchy, and which 
might have satisfied temporarily those persons who believed 
an accommodation with Great Britain on the terms mentioned 
to be an impossibility.'* If nothing else had been accom- 
plished, such action as this on the part of the Assembly would 
have furnished a rallying point around which all moderates 
could have gathered. 

The reactionaiy policy pursued by the old legislature had 
a directly opposite result. It refused to recognize the change 
of sentiment which undoubtedly had occurred throughout the 

' May 29. 

2 Votes, VI, 731. 

3 See Ramsey, History of South Carolina, I, 83-92. 



The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 2y^ 

province ; it refused to allow the delegates in Congress to 
exercise their own discretion on the question of independence ; 
it took no steps to strengthen the position of the reactionary- 
element, and finally it refused to accept the advice of those 
advocates of moderation within the state who saw that the 
world was moving. As a result of this inactivity, men like 
Wilson and Morris who had influence with the Whigs were 
left with no policy to propose as an alternative to a conven- 
tion and the radicals had an easy victory. Not until the 
fourteenth of June did the Assembly take any action on the 
petitions which have been mentioned and by that time the 
current had set too strongly toward the new government to 
be checked. 

The suffrage qualifications prescribed by the Conference 
have been criticised on the ground that they prevented the 
whole people of Pennsylvania from passing judgment on the 
constitution placed before them, but it is difficult to see what 
other course could have been followed. The recommendation 
of the National Congress was the only legal justification of 
the new movement and it would have been highly inconsistent 
to have given votes to men who refused to recognize the 
authority of that body. Within the colony popular sove- 
reignty was the basis of the new constitution, but a large 
section of the people openly declared that they would not 
consider themselves bound by the result of the ballot if it 
went against them. Is it to be wondered that the supporters 
of the new government regarded their opponents with sus- 
picion ? 

The members of the Convention were chosen on July 8, 
and the party of reaction had little share in their selection. 
As Marshall said, the Convention was elected "very quietly." 
On the fifteenth the new body organized under the presidency 
of Benjamin Franklin, and immediately took charge of colonial 
aflfairs. In the Whig manifesto it had been asserted that "as 



274 'r^^^ Revolutionary Movement in Peimsylvania. 

the Assembly hath broken up and deserted its trust the inhab- 
itants have no other body than the Conference to look to for 
the maintenance of order." ' Before adjourning, the Confer- 
ence had unanimously " recommended to the Convention to 
choose and appoint delegates to represent this province in the 
Congress of the United Colonies ; and to select a Council of 
Safety which should exercise the whole of the executive 
powers of government so far as relates to the military defence 
and safety of the province."^ Acting upon this grant of 
power the Convention at once took charge of military affairs, 
disarmed the non-associators, enacted laws regulating the cur- 
rency and the prices of commodities, took measures to uphold 
the liberty of the press, appointed committees to frame ordi- 
nances regarding offences against the state, selected a Council 
of Safety for executive action and chose a new delegation to 
represent the colony in the Continental Congress. Like the 
conventions in other states its measures were energetic on the 
side of independence even at the cost of the fullest degree of 
personal liberty. 

Affairs, in truth, had reached such a stage in Pennsylva- 
nia that vigorous measures were necessary. If the restrictions 
which the Conference had placed upon the exercise of the 
right of suffrage and the more equitable apportionment of 
members of the legislature had given the radicals a majority 
in the Convention, these measures had neither reconciled the 
reactionaries throughout the colony nor given the newly- 
elected body the confidence of the whole community. With 
the successes of the British army around New York the hopes 
of the Tory party began to rise, and at the same time the 
demand for reinforcements issued by Congress served to 
draw away the men upon whom the Whigs depended for the 
maintenance of their power. Fearing that in the absence of 

^ Gazette, May 26. 
^ Proceed., I, 41. 



Tlie New Government Asstmies Legal Form. 275 

so many Associators an election would mean a defeat the 
radical delegates, according to Allen/ delayed the formation 
of a constitution — the work for which they had been elected 
— until they should be more confident of carrying the first 
elections under it, and meanwhile kept control of the state in 
their own hands.' 

If this was the intention of the Convention, the rapid march 
of events soon caused its members to change their minds. The 
growth of conservative ideas convinced them that unless they 
completed their work at once a counter revolution might pre- 
vent their doing it at all. Within the colony obedience was 
being refused to the commands of the Convention, Continental 
money was refused at its par value, and merchants frequently 
refused to sell goods rather than to accept it on any terms. 
Rioting took place, and in August there was much talk of 
recalling the old Assembly. Although this movement was 
unsuccessful, the reactionary agitation served to frighten the 

iPa. Mag. of Hist., IX, iS8. 

2 Among other examples of the exercise of legislative powers by the Conven- 
tion the following may be cited : 

On July 20, it elected new delegates to the Continental Congress. 

On July 23, it chose a Council of Safety for the state and prescribed the oath 
which members of that Council should take. 

On August 9, it voted to postpone the election of new committees of inspec- 
tion throughout the east lest the votes should show a change of sentiment. Elec- 
tions were authorized in the western counties, but the absence of so many 
Associators was held to prevent a fair expression of sentiment in and around 
Philadelphia. 

On August 26, it borrowed $100,000 from Congress. 

On September 3, it passed an ordinance regulating the appointment of justices 
of the peace in the colony ; and nine days later, it prescribed the punishment of 
persons guilty of offences against the United States, and empowered the justices 
to imprison such persons. [See Journals of the Convention, I, 55-79.] 

The attitude of the loyalist party in Pennsylvania may be seen by an examina- 
tion of their testimony before the British Loyalist Commission after the war was 
ended. The statements of Joseph Galloway are given in Wilmot, II, 22, and 
following. [Proceedings of the Loyalist Commissioners, in the Library of 
Congress. ] 



276 The Rcvohitionary Movcmc7it in Pennsylvania. 

radicals. In September, the former legislature again came 
together, and although without a quorum it showed the 
inclination of the reactionaiy element in the colony by voting 
a salaiy of a thousand pounds to Governor Penn and by dis- 
puting the right of the Convention to exercise any power in 
the state. Communication was also maintained with the 
British authorities, and a counter revolution seemed imminent. 

Thus threatened, the Convention hastened to conclude its 
true work. The debates and the conclusions finally reached 
again emphasized the unfortunate nature of the situation. 
Despite the manner of their election there were many moder- 
ate men among the leaders of the new movement, and had 
the great middle party, headed by Dickinson, Morris, Willing 
and their fellows, accepted independence when it was declared 
by Congress and aided in the establishment of a new state 
government, they would now have been able, in union with 
McKean and his friends, to have controlled the Convention 
and to have secured a constitution which would have concili- 
ated rather than alienated the people. In this manner Penn- 
sylvania would have obtained stable government and would 
have been spared the disgrace of the following years. Evi- 
dence is not lacking that a large fraction of the people who 
had heretofore discountenanced the new regime were now 
willing to accept it and to follow moderate leaders in uphold- 
ing any constitution which guaranteed order in place of 
anarchy. Dickinson himself gave advice regarding the docu- 
ment which the Convention was framing, but the majority of 
the moderate party held aloof Their conversion came too 
late to save the state from a period of anarchy. 

An examination of Pennsylvania histoiy during the later 
years of the revolution only increases the regret with which the 
action of the moderates at this time must be regarded. 
Excluding from consideration the reactionary loyalists who 
were hoping that the king would again recei\'e his own, the 



The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 277 

majority of the persons who in I'jyy-y^ were advocating the 
American cause did not belong to the radical party within 
the state. They were, in great part, men who, three years 
earlier, had been advocates of reconciliation with Great 
Britain, but their failure to take a stand for popular liberty at 
home had undermined their influence in the opening days of 
the struggle, and their refusal to accept the inevitable in 1776 
assured the control of the state to the advocates of unrestricted 
democracy. As the Provincial Assembly could not persuade 
itself to take any definite course in harmony with the growth 
of public sentiment until it was too late to prevent the state 
revolution, so the moderates who, within the Convention, 
might have prevented the division among the Whigs, only 
succeeded in accentuating that division. 

The criticism offered by moderate statesmen and their 
antagonism to the plans for a new constitution made the 
radical leaders, like Cannon and Bryan, Matlack and Paine, 
the more determined to force their theories upon the people 
and votes could not be rallied within the Convention in suffi- 
cient numbers to overthrow these men, supported as they 
were by solid delegations from the western counties.^ The 
National Congress could have supported Morris and Dickin- 
son, Wilson and Willing within the Convention, but it could 
not support them in their opposition so long as it was directed 
against the only state government upon which the American 
leaders could rely. The result was the most democratic con- 
stitution yet seen in America, a constitution whose democ- 

1 There were ninety-six members of the Convention, of whom ninety-five appear 
to have been present at the signing of the Constitution. Twenty-three did not 
sign, and of these only five were from the western counties. It will thus be seen 
that these counties were repaying with a vengeance the neglect to which they had 
been subject earlier in the history of the colony. The heaviest vote against the 
Constitution came from the CDunties of York, Lancaster and Philadelphia. Had 
moderate members been present as representatives of Chester and Bucks their 
influence might have been very effective. 



278 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

racy can be realized only by comparison with other state 
papers of the period. 

As was natural the theory on which resistance to England 
was justified occupied a prominent place in the new frame of 
government and it was claimed that America had never been 
subject to Great Britain. The true object of all government, 
said the preamble to this constitution, was to protect the com- 
munity and to enable the individuals composing it to enjoy 
their natural rights. Whenever any system of government 
did not secure these ends the people by common consent 
had the right to take such measures to remedy the evil as 
seemed best. Allegiance to the king had been the price paid 
by the colony for the protection which the royal authority 
afforded, and when that protection was withdrawn the duty 
of allegiance ended. The old government of the state lapsed 
with the failure of the king to maintain his share of the com- 
pact and the people therefore were perfectly justified in fram- 
ing a new agreement among themselves. Only in this way 
could anarchy be prevented, for the original compact had 
been dissolved and man was again in a state of nature. 
This was the reason given for discarding the old government. 

The Declaration of Right was the foundation of the new 
system. Since all political power was originally vested in the 
whole people the governmental machinery must be directed 
towards the protection and benefit of the community " and 
not for the emolument or advantage of any single man, family 
or sett of men who are a part only of that community." * No 
plainer demonstration could be given of the feeling which 
existed in the colony than this affirmation. In the opinion 
of the Convention the only qualifications for an active partici- 
pation in the affairs of government were a " common interest 
with and attachment to the community." Lest it might be urged 
that the inhabitants of the colony were a part of the British 

* Constitution of 1776, Declaration of Right, Section 5. 



The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 279 

people and that the general will could be determined only 
by a joint assemblage of the two continents, the Convention 
declared^ "that all men have a natural inherent right to 
emigrate from one state to another that will receive them, to 
form a new state in vacant countries, or in such countries as 
they can purchase, whenever they think that thereby they 
can promote their own happiness." This article practically 
asserted that the Friends had founded a new state on their 
immigration into America and that the more recent emigrants 
from Europe had become constituent parts of that state upon 
their arrival in the Quaker community. It thus appealed 
to all parties within the colony. 

The innovations introduced by the Constitution of 1776 all 
tended toward democracy and equahty of privilege. Such 
portions of the old frame of government as did not interfere 
with the conceptions outlined in the Declaration of Right 
were retained under the new regime. The single legislative 
chamber which had proved successful in the past was kept 
by the Convention, but the unjust system of representation 
was thoroughly changed. Members were allotted to the vari- 
ous counties and to the city of Philadelphia in proportion to the 
number of taxables resident therein, and each county was 
allowed to select its members by districts or by general ticket 
as it considered wiser. One year's residence entitled all tax- 
paying freemen, twenty-one years of age, to the suffrage, no 
religious test or qualification being required. Members of 
the Assembly must have resided at least two years in the city 
or county from which they were chosen, must declare a belief 
in one God and in the inspiration of the Scriptures, and swear 
(or affirm) that they would support the Constitution of Penn- 
sylvania. 

The reliance which the new movement had placed upon the 
committee system is seen by an examination of the provisions 

1 Sec. 6. 



28o The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

for an executive under the new constitution. This department 
of the government was entrusted to an Executive Council com- 
posed of one member from each county and one from the city of 
Philadelphia. There was indeed a provision for a governor of 
the state, but he was elected from the members of the Council, 
and was in reality little more than the presiding officer of an 
executive committee. Such influence as was exercised by 
this officer was due to his personality and not to his position. 
The great power in the state was the Assembly. Either 
alone or in union with the governor of its choice this body 
not only controlled all state appointments but had authority 
over the judiciary itself,' and such powers as were given to the 
Council only emphasized the importance of the radical sec- 
tions of the state. The Assembly was subject to the over- 
sight of the people in two ways : Legislative proceedings must 
be made public and once in seven years the community had 
the power to inquire into the whole conduct of the govern- 
ment. " Except when the welfare of the state may require " 
the doors of the house in which the Assembly sat were to be 
open to the public, and the votes and proceedings of the 
legislature were to be printed weekly for the perusal of its 
constituents. At the request of two members the yeas and 
nays on any question were to be recorded, and any member 
could declare the reasons for his vote. " Except on occasions 
of sudden necessity" no measure "of a public nature" 
could be enacted into law during the session in which it was 
proposed, and in all cases laws must be printed for the con- 

^ The fact that the Council had a share in the election of the governor can 
hardly be regarded as a serious limitation on the choice of the Assembly when it is 
remembered that the latter body was six times as large as the former and that this 
disproportion constantly tended to increase. 

There was one provision of the new constitution which is especially interesting 
in the light of the controversy over fishery rights to which reference has been 
made. It declares that "the inhabitants of this state shall have liberty . 
to fish in all boatable waters and others not in private property." Thus an old 
cause of complaint was removed. 



The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 281 

sideration of the people before they passed to the debate 
upon their last reading. 

The second check upon the Assembly was the provision 
for Censors. Once in seven years the people were required to 
elect two persons from each city and county whose duty it 
was to ascertain whether or not the constitution "had been 
preserved inviolate in every part ;" and to see that the legisla- 
tive and executive branches of government had "performed 
their duty as guardians of the people." They were to inquire 
also whether or not the public taxes had been "justly laid and 
collected, ... in what manner the public monies had been dis- 
posed of, and whether the laws had been duly executed." 
If defects were found, impeachment could be ordered, appro- 
priate legislation recommended, or, by a vote of two-thirds, 
a new convention could be summoned. In tl)is last case, 
however, all proposed changes in the constitution must be 
submitted to the people at least six months before the meet- 
ing of the Convention in order that the community might 
instruct its delegates what action to take on the changes pro- 
posed. One article in the Declaration of Right announced 
explicitly^ "that the people have a right to assemble together 
to consult for their common good, to instruct their representa- 
tives, and to apply to the legislature for redress of grievances 
by address, petition or remonstrance." Few constitutions 
enacted since 1776 have contained more radical clauses than 
these.^ 

After providing that the constitution which it had framed 
should become the law of the colony without a formal ratifica- 
tion by the people, the Convention adjourned on September 
28 amid great excitement. Its last action had seemed to 
violate, in an outrageous manner, the very principles of popu- 
lar sovereignty which the new constitution professed to honor, 

»Sec. 16. 

2 See Paul Leicester Ford, in the Pol. Science Quar., Vol. X, p. 457. 



282 The Revohitionary Movemait in Pennsylvania. 

and bitter attacks upon its work were immediately made. 
How much of the opposition throughout the state was caused 
by the constitution itself, and how much by the manner in 
which it had been framed is difficult to ascertain. Thomas 
Wharton, Jr., was friendly to the new movement, yet he 
wrote to Arthur St. Clair : *' True it is, there are many faults 
which I hope one day to see removed ; but it is true that if 
the government should be at this time overset, it would be 
attended with the worst consequences, not only to this state 
but to the whole continent in the opposition we are making 
to Great Britain.'" Gordon, who was an eye-witness of the 
scenes in Philadelphia, gave his opinion in these words : 
" Great numbers in Pennsylvania are not satisfied with their 
constitution apprehending that it possesses too great a propor- 
tion of democracy, and that the State is not sufficiently 
guarded against the evils which may result from the preva- 
lence of a democratic party, or the dangerous influence of 
demagogues. Mr. Sam'l Adams has been thought or known 
to have concerned himself so unduly in the business as to 
have provoked some to drop distant hints of an assassination." ^ 
Even before the adjournment of the Convention "K.," in 
the Packet of September 24, had expressed his dissatisfaction 
with the work of the radical leaders. " In the constitution I 
see no kind of power delegated to the executive yet many 
barriers against it, but in the Assembly I find the most 
unbounded liberty and yet no barriers. ... If men were 
wise and virtuous as angels a single legislative assembly 
would be the best form of government that could be contrived 
for them except a despotic one, which being more simple 

' Penna. Mag. of Hist., V, 436. 

^ Amer. Rev., II, 369. 

Wells, in his Life of Adams, agrees with this opinion. He believes that much 
of the democratic sentiment of the Pennsylvania Constitution came from Adams, 
and adds that designs were probably had against his life. [Life and Public Ser- 
vices of Samuel Adams, II, 438.] 



The New Govcr7tmc7tt Ass7{incs Legal Form. 283 

would be nearer perfection." As men were not angels, he 
concluded that much more restraint than that provided by 
the constitution was necessary. Another writer, in the 
Packet of October 22, declared that, like Cromwell, the Con- 
vention defended its own work with armed men, allowing no 
opportunity for the people to pass free judgment upon it.^ 
The Philosophical Society declared that the new framework 
of government was in harmony neither with the sentiments 
of the Continental Congress nor with the opinions of " those 
most distinguished authors who have deliberately considered 
the subject," ^ upon which the Post remarked that the Society 
was but "a junto of grandees and their lickspittle echoes." 

The opposition did not confine itself to general criticism. 
Protests against particular features of the Constitution were 
numerous.^ One of the most acute of the general criticisms 
was that of " Christopher Scotus " in the Packet of October 
29. " Our new frame of government would do very well to 
feed a fanciful imagination as a mere chimera, but is such as 
never did and never can subsist in our world while human 
nature is so weak and depraved as at present." Probably 

^ This action, as do so many others, shows a remarkable similarity in thought 
between Pennsylvania and Maryland. In the latter state a convention had been 
summoned on July 3. A body elected by direction of the various county commit- 
tees had apportioned the members of this new convention, had determined the 
suffrage qualifications in city and country, and had itself controlled the legislative, 
executive and judicial power of the state until the convention met. This body in 
turn not only framed a constitution, placed it in operation without awaiting popu- 
lar action, but meanwhile carried on the government. Indeed, there was no 
essential difference in the revolutionary program in the two states. A wise 
colonial policy, however, had given the southern community a unity to which her 
northern neighbor was for a long time a stranger. Regarding the protection by 
the military, Ettwein, in his narrative of events, declares that two regiments of 
New Englanders were to come to Philadelphia to protect the convention in case 
of need, but arrangements were made which rendered such precautions unneces- 
sary. 

^Packet, October 22. 

3 See the Gazette and Post of October 23 and 24. 



284 The Revohitionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

the real cause of the opposition among the moderate classes 
was not the constitution as a frame of government so much 
as the efforts of the Convention to force its will upon the 
community, and a fear of the men who were trying to rule 
the state. Some evidences of this overbearing disposition 
found their way into the constitution, as in the provisions 
regulating the first elections on November 5, but the ordi- 
nances are tainted more deeply with this spirit. Especial 
objection was made to the ordinance imposing a tax of twenty 
shillings a month upon non-Associators in addition to the 
annual levy of twenty per centum upon their property. 

On October 21, a mass meeting was held at which "Can- 
non, Matlack, Young and Col. Smith of York County spoke 
for the Convention, Col. McKean and Dickinson against it." 
This meeting was attended by fifteen hundred people and the 
sentiment seems to have been against the Convention.^ The 
intention of the meeting was to persuade the voters of the 
state to refuse to take the oaths required of electors, and to 
cast no ballots for members of the Executive Council. If 
possible, the opposition aimed to elect a sufficiently large 
fraction of the Assembly to force a compromise upon the 
radical party and to secure modifications in the constitution. 
The first part of this plan easily succeeded. At the elections 
on November 5, the City and County of Philadelphia voted 
against the radical nominees and disapproved the constitution, 
so far as was possible, by declining to elect Councilors.^ The 
western counties, however, gave a decided radical majority. 
After the election a second public meeting was held in Phila- 
delphia to instruct the eastern Assemblymen to secure, if 
possible, certain alterations in the frame of government. 
Among the changes desired were the adoption of a bicameral 

'Gazette and Packet, October 22 and 23 ; Marshal's Diary. 
2 See Marshall's Diary for November 5 and 6, and Dickinson's Vindication in 
Sulle, p. 375. 



The New Government Assumes Legal Form. 285 

legislature, the abolition of the censors, the suppression of the 
obnoxious oaths, life tenure for the judiciary and, if it could be 
accomplished, the calling of a new constitutional convention.' 
The new Assembly refused all such proposals as these 
even when accompanied by an acceptance of its temporary 
authority. The result was stagnation and anarchy in the con- 
duct of state business, and not until Congress threatened to 
take the Pennsylvania government under its own control was 
anything like an orderly administration restored. For this 
paralysis of government the members of Congress, and more 
particularly the New England and Virginia delegations, have 
been severely blamed, but this censure is not justified by the 
facts. The party in the national body which had favored 
American independence wished to see the State of Pennsyl- 
vania supporting that position, but they had no other interest 
in state politics, and it is doubtful if the national body would 
have opposed any state government which was willing to 
accept independence as a fact. The initiative for whatever 
alliance existed between the radicals throughout the state and 
the democrats in the Congress came from the colonial side, 
although there were doubtless cases in which the democratic 
arguments of Congressional delegates had turned individuals 
against the old Assembly. 

Congressional interference was not the disturbing factor 
in Pennsylvania politics. If, indeed, the Assembly had 

iSee the Diary of James Allen in Penna. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., IX, i88 ; 
Dickinson's Vindication in Stille, p. 375 ; and Paul Leicester Ford in Pol. 
Science Quar., X, 457. The best description of the intense excitement of the 
time is given in the article by Mr. Ford, but an examination of the contem- 
porary writings in press and pamphlet form is as helpful for this period as for the 
earlier ones. The so-called ironclad oath required at elections compelled the 
voter to swear (or affirm) that he would "be faithful and true to the common- 
wealth" and would not " directly or indirectly do any act or thing prejudicial or 
injurious to the Constitution or government thereof as established by the Conven- 
tion." Some radical writers declared this oath to be " the most moderate yet 
established in any of the United States." 



286 Tlie Revolutionary Movement in Pen7tsylvania. 

supported the progressive national movement the colonial 
crisis might have been postponed, but sooner or later a 
change in internal pohcy would have been forced upon the 
conservatives. Whether or not that change would have been 
forced upon the colony by violence is an open question, but 
it must have come. On national issues the moderate men in 
the Assembly were guided by as pure patriotism as were any 
of their radical opponents, but for twenty years the reaction- 
ary forces had been alienating different sections of the colony 
and in their hour of triumph the democrats were suspicious 
of every one who did not heartily agree with their radical pro- 
gram. It is this fact, rather than any Congressional interfer- 
ence, which accounts for Pennsylvania's loss of some of her 
ablest leaders at the time when they were most needed. 
During the early portion of 1776 this loss was not so marked, 
for Franklin and McKean were inferior to none of the earlier 
leaders of the colony, but with the era of the Convention and 
the entrance of Franklin into national diplomacy there was a 
noticeable deterioration in the character of the state legfislators. 
This deterioration might have been prevented had Dickin- 
son, and Morris, Wilson and Reed been induced to support the 
new movement at an earlier time. So far as their hesitancy 
was due to the failure of Congress to provide a suitable 
national government that body may be blamed, but here, as 
in their own case, it was a question of judgment and not of 
patriotism or honesty of purpose. The defection of the con- 
servative and moderate leaders, or more exactly their failure 
to keep pace with the advance in revolutionary sentiment, 
necessarily threw the leadership of the colony into the hands 
of theorists like Cannon or demagogues like Paine. Previous 
association had inclined the West to follow these men and as 
the conservatives opposed the national as well as the local 
ambition of the West even as late as September, 1776, it was 
only natural that the delegates from that section should con- 



The New Gov eminent Assumes Legal Form. 287 

tinue to follow radical leadership. " Letters were sent from 
Philadelphia into the country saying that there was no need 
to choose learned or especially intelligent people at the elec- 
tions but only those heartily devoted to the common cause ; 
which recommendation was faithfully observed," said Ett- 
wein, and as a consequence a compact party was formed with 
which it was useless to argue. This party disliked the East. 
The foundation of its resentment was not the policy of the 
Assembly after 1770, but the earlier rivalries between the two 
sections of the colony. Unable to move the eastern oligarchy 
by persuasion or by the justice of their cause, force was their 
only alternative and the troubles with England gave an oppor- 
tunity for its effective exercise. 

It was under such circumstances that Pennsylvania made 
her entrance into the national union. The history of her 
political life under the democratic constitution of 1776 is but 
a continuation of the previous discontent except that the 
former opposition now ruled the state. Not until the adop- 
tion of a compromise frame of government in 1789 was har- 
mony restored. Meanwhile the state paid the penalty for the 
early injustice of the conservative east and the later tyranny 
of the radical west by a decade of personal and party struggles 
hardly equaled for intensity and bitterness in any period of 
our national or local history. The effects of this bitterness 
have not been outgrown to this day. 



APPENDIX. 



Authorities. 

There is no more important source of information concern- 
ing Pennsylvania history than the colonial press and upon the 
evidence given in its columns the author has relied more than 
upon any other source. 

The following is a list of the more important publications : 
The Pennsylvania Gazette, established 1728 ; published by 
Franklin & Meredith, 1729; by Franklin alone 1732 ; by Frank- 
lin & Hall, 1747-48 ; by David Hall, February 1766, and by 
Hall & Sellers after May, 1766. 

The Pennsylvania Journal, established by William Bradford 
in 1742, and published by William & Thomas Bradford from 
1766 until 1 79 1 except during the period of the British occu- 
pancy of Philadelphia from September, 1777, until July, 1778. 

The Pennsylvania Chronicle, established January 6, 1767, 
by William Goddard and conducted by him until 1773. Dur- 
ing the first three years of this period Joseph Galloway and 
Thomas Wharton were Goddard's silent partners and the 
Chronicle was conservative in tone, but upon their retirement 
in 1770, Goddard came more nearly in touch with the radical 
element among the people. 

The Pennsylvania Packet, established in November, 1771, 
by John Dunlap, and printed by him at Philadelphia until 
1777, and then at Lancaster. The Packet and Gazette are, 
on the whole, the best representatives of the moderate senti- 
ment throughout the colony. 

The Pennsylvania Ledger, established in January, 1775, as 
a Tory paper and conducted on decidedly conservative lines 
until November, 1776, when it was forced to suspend. It 

(288) 



Appendix. 289 

came to life again during the British occupancy of the city, 
but never survived their flight. 

The Pennsylvania Evening Post, established in January, 
1775. by Benjamin Towne and published by him at Philadel- 
phia until 1782. As late as 1777 the Post was an extremely 
radical sheet advocating national independence and a new 
state government. When the British captured Philadelphia, 
Towne changed sides and was proscribed by the state gov- 
ernment. He was permitted to continue his paper in 1778 
only by publicly recanting his British sympathies. The influ- 
ence of the Post, however, was never again so great as in the 
first two years of its publication. 

Of importance in a consideration of the German influence 
throughout the state is Christopher Sauer's Der Pennsylva- 
nische Berichte. This sheet was published at , Germantown, 
and although not the only German newspaper in Pennsylva- 
nia during the Colonial period, it was probably the most 
influential. Its tone was on the whole conservative. 

Next in importance to the Colonial newspapers as indicat- 
ing the trend of political thought must be placed the pamphlet 
literature. This method of influencing public opinion came into 
prominence during the proprietary-crown struggle, and a short 
list of the more important pamphlets issued at that time has 
been given. ^ With the advance of the revolutionary move- 
ment, Pennsylvania was flooded with pamphlets expressing all 
shades of opinion. The titles of most of these pamphlets are 
given in Hildeburn, " Issues of the Philadelphia Press," and 
nothing less than a careful examination of these papers will 
insure an understanding of the popular feeling during these 
years. Some tracts not published in Philadelphia had an 
extensive circulation in that city, and these, of course, are not 
given in Hildeburn. Excellent files of the provincial press 
and extensive collections of the Colonial and revolutionary 

1 Ante, p 97. 
19 



290 The Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

pamphlets are in the Hbraries of the Historical Society of 
Pennsylvania, and of the American Philosophical Society at 
Philadelphia. 

Much information has been obtained also from the collec- 
tions of laws and early manuscripts in Philadelphia and Wash- 
ington as well as from other works of a more distinctly 
secondary character. A list of the more prominent and 
helpful authorities among these latter divisions is appended : 

Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives of the Province of 
Pennsylvania, 1 682-1776. 6 Vols. Phila., 1752-76. 

Journals of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylva- 
nia, 1776-81, with the Proceedings of the several Committees and Conventions 
before and at the Commencement of the American Revolution. [Michael 
Hillegas, Editor.] Phila., 1782. 

The Acts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 
1777-81, with an Appendix containing the " Laws now in Force passed between 
September 30, 1775, and the Revolution." Phila., 1782. 

Proceedings relative to the Calling of the Conventions of 1776 and 1790. 
Harrisburg, 1825. 

The Statutes at large of Pennsylvania, 1682-1801, compiled by James T. 
Mitchell and Henry Flanders. Harrisburg, 1896. [This edition is as yet 
incomplete. For the period not covered by this work recourse must be had to the 
inferior collections published by Bradford, Franklin, Hall & Sellers, Dallas, 
Carey & Bioren and Smith. The Pennsylvania Constitutions are in Poore : Federal 
and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, &c. 2 Vols. Washington, 1877.] 

The Pennsylvania Archives 1664-1790. Series I, 12 Vols. Samuel Hazard, 
Editor. Phila., 1852-56. Series II, 19 Vols. J. B. Linn & W. H. Egle, 
Editors. Harrisburg, 1874-90. Series III, 30 Vols. W. H, Egle & G. E. 
Reed, Editor. Harrisburg, 1894-99. 

The Pennsylvania Colonial Records, 1683-1776-1790. Minutes of the Provincial 
Council, 10 Vols. Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council, 6 Vols. Harris- 
burg, 1852-53. 

The Journals of Congress. 

The Madison Papers, 3 Vols. Washington, 1840. 

The Archives of Maryland, 13 Vols. William H. Browne, Editor. Baltimore, 
1883-94. 

Hanson, A. C. Laws of Maryland made since 1763. Annapolis, 1787. 

Hazard, Samuel. Register of Pennsylvania. 16 Vols. 1828-36. 

Day, Sherman. Historical Collections of the State of Pennsylvania. Phila., 1843. 

Watson, John F. Annals of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania in the Olden 
Time. 2 Vols. Phila., 1857. 



Appe7idix. 291 

y Marshall, Christopher. Passages from his Diary. [Edited by William 
Duane, Jr.] Phila., 1839-49. 

Graydon, Alexander. Memoirs of His Own Time, with Reminiscences of the 
Men and Events of the Revolution. [Edited by J. S. Littell.] Phila., 1846. 

Balch, Thomas. The Shippen Papers. Phila., 1855. 

The Penn Manuscripts, 1681-1776, particularly the Letter Books, 12 Vols. ; 
The Private Correspondence, 3 Vols., and the Letters from Thomas Penn to 
Hockley, Peters and others, i Vol. 

The ^Vharton Manuscripts. 
. The Narrative of Jacob Ettwein. [These three groups of papers are in the 
Library of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania.] 

The Loyalist Papers. 

The Ephraim Blaine Papers. 

The Pennsylvania Papers. 

The Peter Force Papers, including the printed Archives. [These four groups of 
papers are in the Library of Congress at Washington.] 

The Works of John Adams. 10 Vols. Boston, 1850-56. 

The Political Writings of John Dickinson. 2 Vols. Wilmington, 1801. 

The Works of Benjamin Franklin. 10 Vols. New York, 1887-88 [The 
Sparks' edition has also been occasionally referred to.] 

The Works of James Wilson. 3 Vols. Phila., 1804. 

Wells, William V. The Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams. 3 Vols. 
Boston, 1865. 

Still6, Charles J. The Life and Times of John Dickinson. Phila., 1891. 
[This volume derives additional value from the Vindication of Dickinson and the 
Statement of Charles Thomson, which form a portion of its appendix.] 

Austin, James T. The Life of Elbridge Gerry. 2 Vols. Boston, 1829. 

Reed, William B. The Life and Correspondence of Joseph Reed. 2 Vols. 
Phila., 1847. 

Gordon, Thomas F. A History of Pennsylvania from its Discovery by Euro- 
peans to 1776. Phila., 1S29. 

Proud, Robert, The History of Pennsylvania, 1681-1742. [Appendix, 
1760-70.] 2 Vols. Phila., 1797-98. 

Shepherd, William R. A History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania. 
[Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, Vol. VL] 
New York, 1896. 

Sharpless, Isaac. A History of Quaker Government in Pennsylvania. Vol. I, 
/ A Quaker Experiment in Government ; Vol. H, The Quakers in the Revolution. 
Phila., 1897, 1899. 

Westcott, Thompson. A History of Philadelphia. [This is the original work 
as published in the Dispatch and now in the Library of the Historical Society of 
Pennsylvania. An Abridgment was published by Scharf, J. Thomas, and West- 
cott, Thompson, in 3 Vols. Phila., 1884.] 

Scharf, J. Thomas. History of Maryland. 3 Vols. Baltimore, 1879. 



292 TJic Revolutionary Movement in Pennsylvania. 

Scharf, J. Thomas. The Chronicles of Bahimore. Baltimore, 1874. 

The Minutes of the Common Council of Philadelphia, 1 704-1 776. Philadel- 
phia, 1847. 

Purviance, Robert. A Narrative of Events which occurred in Baltimore Town 
during the Revolutionary War. Baltimore, 1849. 

Greene, Evarts B. The Provincial Governor. [Harvard Historical Studies, 
Vol. Vn.] New York, 1898. 

Tyler, Moses Coit. A History of American Literature during the Colonial 
Time. 2 Vols. New York, 1897. 

Tyler, Moses Coit. The Literary History of the American Revolution. 2 Vols. 
New York, 1897. 

MacPherson, David. Annals of Commerce, Manufactures, Fisheries and 
Navigation. 4 Vols. London, 1805. 

Sheffield, John Baker Holroyd, Lord. Obsen.-ations on the Commerce of the 
American States. London, 1783-84. 

Aside from these distinct volumes, mention should be made 
of the publications of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, 
including the Memoirs as well as the Magazine of History 
and Biography. Several suggestive articles also have been 
found in the American Historical Review and in the Political 
Science Quarterly, but no other field has been so rich in 
suggestion as the press and pamphlet literature to which 
reference has already been made. 



INDEX. 

Adams, John, criticises "second Petition to the King," 205; motion to secure 
unbiased action in Congress defeated, 249; motion recommending the adop- 
tion of new governments by the colonies passed, 253. 

Adams, Samuel, favors a central national government, 248; Democratic senti- 
ments in state constitution largely referable to, 282; hints of his assassination, 
282. 

Aristocracy, its position in the colonies, 9; supports British supremacy in America, 
14; opposed by non-English immigrants throughout the West, 22; contends 
with the Democratic party for the German vote, 32; outcry against monopo- 
listic tendencies of, 83; charged with self-aggrandisement in legislation, 88; 
opposition to, 91-96; revolt against its authority, 252. 

Assembly of Pennsylvania, Quaker control of, the result of finesse, 13; questions 
of supremacy, 16; obtains the rights and privileges of an independent 
government, 17; opposed to proprietary influence, 18; efforts to obtain 
supreme authority, 20; majority of members of, elected by Chester, Phila- 
delphia and Bucks counties, 23; erroneous views of, in regard to Pennsylva- 
nia Germans, 30; under charter of 1682, 41; under Constitution of 1701, 
42; change in, necessitated by withdrawal of Delaware, 43; unjust discrim- 
ination against Philadelphia and the West, 45-50; settles rate of taxation on 
lands, 50; regulations regarding residence of members, 51; concessions of 
1776 insufficient to prevent minority gaining control, 52; Acts of, used as a 
precedent in Maryland, 54; attempts to throw off proprietary authority, lOO; 
confirms the measures recommended by the Continental Congress, 1 89-191 ; 
in 1775 yields what insurgents demand, 208; defeats motion to admit public 
to hear debates of the House, 219; instructs Congressional delegates to oppose 
independence, 226; opposition aroused by its conservatism, 227-229; refuses 
to rescind its instructions, 235; arraigned by radical writers, 243, 244; usurps 
authority and misuses power, 244; loses its chance of retaining control of 
the colony, 253; accused of complicity with England in producing financial 
distress and commercial decline, 258; changes instructions of Congressional 
delegates, 260; left without a quorum, it loses its former ascendency, 264; 
urged to follow the example of South Carolina, 272; refuses to take cogni- 
zance of the signs of the times, 273; again convenes, though without a 
quorum, 276. See, also. Convention and Provincial Conference. 

Associators of Pennsylvania organize, 196; favored by Committee of Safety, 209, 
210, 212; non-combatants to contribute toward the support of, 217, 218;, 
threaten the Assembly, 221, 223; claim the right of suffrage, 246; the 
Conference grants their claim, 267. 

(293) 



294 Index. 

Baltimore, the commercial rival of Philadelphia, 58, 59; its commercial impor- 
tance, 59 ff; seaport of the Susquehanna Valley, 64; influence upon Pennsyl- 
vania democracy, 75, 169. 

" Birds of Passage," 73. 

Bland, Richard, maintains the rights of the people to election and representation, 
146 note. 

Books, influence of, in American colonies, 119-121. 

Bookselling, not included in vendue system, 84. 

Boston Port Bill, attitude of Philadelphians toward, 160-164; action of Philadel- 
phians in relation to, rightly interpreted by Samuel Adams, 166; disapproved 
of by Quakers, 168; repeal of, demanded by Mar}'land, 170; position of 
Pennsylvania regarding, 172 ff. 

Cadwalader, John, appointed on committee to memorialize the Assembly, 215. 

Canals, efforts to secure a system of, 61, 65, 76. 

Commerce, a factor in the state and in the national Revolution, 55 ff. 

Committee for the City and Liberties of Philadelphia, 1775, labors of, 209; appeal 
of, against non-combatants, 219-221; states grievances and reason for post- 
poning a convention, 241-243; meets and adopts resolutions condemning the 
Assembly, 254-256; address of, 257 'f'^ote; fixes a price for salt, rum, sugar, 
etc, 259 note; preparations of, for a new government, 264. 

Committee for the County of Philadelphia, reactionary protests of, 256, 257, 

Committee of Correspondence and Committee of Safety, difference between, 190 
note. 

Committee of Safety, composition of, 209; favors larger appropriations for defence, 
215-217; protests to Assembly against non-fighting and non -paying citizens, 
221 note. 

"Common Sense," its publication and influence, 235-237; text of advertisement 
of, 238 note; publications to counteract, 237-239; supplement to, 239-241. 

Conestogoe massacre, loi, 109, 11 1, 112. 

Constitution of 1776, its adoption, 277; declaration of right, 278; Assembly 
made directly responsible to the people, 280; censors to be apppointed everj- 
seven years, 281; changes desired in, 284. See also Convention. 

Continental Congress, delegates from Pennsylvania to, 178; rise of, 179; growth 
of, 190; authority of, recognized in Pennsylvania, 207; efforts to have it 
declared the supreme power in the land, 248; invests the people of Pennsyl- 
vania with privileges heretofore exercised by the Assembly, or the Conven- 
tion, 260; arbitrarj' action of, in relation to Pennsylvania government, 285. 

Contract, the basis of government in Pennsylvania, 8. 

Convention (Constitutional), earliest acts of, 274; hampered in its work of fram- 
ing a constitution, 276; adopts ultra-democratic fomi of government, 277; 
declares Constitution operative without ratification by the people, 281 ; cen- 
sured and its work attacked, 283. See also Assembly, Provincial Conference 
and Provincial Convention. 



Index. 295 

Council, under charter of 1682, 41 ; under Constitution of 1701, 42. 
Cumberland county, erection of, 46; requests withdrawal of instructions, 257; 
petition of, 270-272. 

Democracy in America, 1-12; in Pennsylvania, 12-15; increase of its power, 
167-188; assumes control of the colony, 267-279; position under the Consti- 
tution of 1776, 287. 

Denny, William, his conflict with the Assembly, 21. 

Dickinson, John, argues in favor of colony, 15; commends German settlers, 32 
note; influence of his writings, 38, 141-143; leads Presbyterians of the East 
in opposing overthrow of proprietary authority, 100; opposes England's 
restrictive policy, 125; changes from conservative to radical, 133; favors 
resistance to Boston port bill, 160-163; recognizes rights of the West, 174, 
177; favors a strong colonial and national government, 177, 181-184; his 
opportunity in 1775, 198-203; temporizes and loses his prestige, 204-207; 
appointed on committee to memorialize the Assembly, 215; attitude towards 
independence, 224, 225, 251, 261-263; chairman of Committee on Representa- 
tion, 246; advises regarding state constitution, 276; opposes convention, 284. 

Dunkers, religion cause of immigration, 28. 

Eden, WiUiam, Governor of Maryland, his influence, 171. 

Episcopalians, support the Proprietary against the Friends, 26; power of, during 
French and Indian war, 37; disqualified to serve as leaders in a revolt because 
of loyalty to the Church, 39. 

Ettwein, Jacob, Rev., Germans in relation to England and the colony, 153 note, > 
166, 206, 215, 283, 287. 

Excise laws, widen the breach between East and West, 72; defended in the news- 
papers, 73; lead to extensive smuggling, 74. 

Farmer's Letters, 119, 137, I38, 139 141, 142, 262. 

Federation, American, plan for, proposed by Franklin, 224. 

Ferries, free, needed as a stimulus to trade, 64; abortive attempt to secure, 70. 

Fishing, laws restricting, considered a menace to liberty, 86; rights granted, 280. 

Franklin, Benjamin, his mission to England, loi, 103; contrasted with Galloway, 
I02; counsels submission to Parliament, 127; educated by trend of events, he 
renounces allegiance to Great Britain, 137, 146, 147, 196, 198; influence as 
member of Committee of Safety, 208, 209, 217; efforts to obtain a strong 
government in state and nation, 223, 224; votes for national independence, 
263; entrance into national diplomacy, a loss to his state, 286. 

Freneau, Philip, boldly espouses the American cause, 231 note. 

Friends, causes which brought them to Pennsylvania, 8; advocate American inde-*''^ 
pendence, but deprecate separation from the mother country, 14; theory of 
right government, 15; practical independence their object, 19; gain the Ger-^- 
mans as allies, 24; conscientious scruples the basis of sympathy with Men- 



296 Index. 

^ 
nonites, 28; means adopted to enlist the Germans on their side, 29; again 

assume control at close of Seven Years' War, 37; resist encroachments on 

their rights, but will not fight, 38; protest against practices at vendues, 81; 

their championship of the Indians, 106-112; dissatisfaction with leadership 

of, 250. See also Quakers. 

Furs, traffic in, exercises important influence on Pennsylvania politics, 25. 

Galloway, Joseph, efforts of, to obtain change in state government, lOl, 132, 179 
note, 180, 181; ceases to be Speaker, 185; urges union of the colonies, but 
loyalty to Great Britain, 195 note; urges the need of a free press, 199 note; 
estimate of Radical party, 223 note. 

George III., his estimate of petition from American colonies, 226. 

German settlers unjustly treated by the Friends, 23; fears of their establishing a 
distinct state within the province, 24; basis of alliance with the Quakers, 24; 
dangers that threatened in the East and in the West, 25; invaluable allies in 
colonial conflicts, 26; advocate independence of both King and Assembly, 
^- 27; social advancement, the reward for political fidelity, 29; withdrawal of 
European financial support tends to make them self-reliant, 30 note; Western 
Germans oppose Great Britain and the Proprietary, 31; hold balance of 
power and are offered seats in the Assembly, 37; separated by customs, race 
and religion from English Quakers, 40, 53; market their produce in Mary- 
land, 61-65; excused by Parliament from military service, 105; indifferent to 
England and inimical to Great Britain, 141; espouse the patriotic cause, 206;' 
non-combatants offer money in lieu of service, 222; militia of Philadelphia 
ask for the franchise and a share in the government, 267. 

Gerry, Elbridge, views of, in relation to the Revolutionary spirit in Pennsylvania, 
252 note. 

Government, its fundamental principles as stated by Lord Sommers, lO; by Penn, 
12, 13; right of the people to decide upon form of, 230. 

Great Britain, political theory in, 1 14-122; forbids colonial expansion, 100; seeks 
to dominate colonial commerce, 123-129. 

History, a favorite study in Pennsylvania, 120. 

Independence, the dominant idea with Quaker colonists, 12; urged in Congress, 
223; Pennsylvania not ready for, 224; views for and against, 229 note; dec- 
laration of, and collapse of state government coincident, 234 ; declared for 
by neighboring colonies, 259; position of moderate party regarding, 261. 

Indians, as neighbors and customers, 104- 1 13. 

Jackson, Richard, instructions to, 127. 

Jefferson, Thomas, political theories of, 10; position at the opening of the Revo- 
lution, 230; his opinion of Dickinson, 205; considers moderate party ready 
for independence, 261. 



Index. 297 

Lancaster county, erection of, 45; attitude toward the Revolutionary movement, 

182, 219, 277. 
Land companies under proclamation of 1763, 99. 
Law, study of, in America, 121. 

Lawyers, charged with malfeasance, 89; regarded with suspicion, 94. 
Lexington and Concord, battles of, effect on legislation, 192, 194, 196. 
Locke, John, essays of, as understood by Tories and Whigs in England, 8; as 

viewed in America, 9. 

McKean, Thomas, chairman City Committee, 257 note; president Provincial 
Conference, 266; helps to frame address concerning Constitutional Conven- 
tion, 269; opposes radicalism within the Convention, 284. 

Marshall, Christopher, opinion upon Pennsylvania politics, 199 note, 246. 

Maryland, influence upon Pennsylvania, 54, 169 ff ; character of Assemblies in, 
56; draws Pennsylvania trade from the Delaware to the Chesapeake, 59; 
Assembly adopts measures to stimulate trade, 62; first general state Con- 
gress meets at Annapolis, 76; takes the initiative in demanding repeal of 
offensive laws, 147-149; Convention assumes control of the colony, 170; no 
internal rebellion, 171. 

Massachusetts, attitude regarding British colonial policy, 144. * 

Mechanics protest against their exclusion from government, 79, 80; excluded 
from social advantages, 86; revolt against the aristocracy, 252. 

Mennonites, causes that led them to America, 28. 

Middle states, threaten to secede, 261, 262; secession averted by agreement 
among Pennsylvania delegates, 263. 

Mifflin, Thomas, action of, in relation to Boston Port Bill, i6off. 

Moravian Church, governing board of, declares on the side of the colonists, 208. 

Morris, Robert, attitude regarding national independence, 263. 

Neutral Zone for Indian settlements bitterly opposed, 99-101 ; open violence 

against its advocates with difficulty prevented, 107. 
Non-combatants, recommendation of the Pennsylvania Assembly concerning, 211; 

must fight, or pay, 216 ff; petition the Assembly, 219. 

Oaths in colonial Pennsylvania, 28; under the Constitution of 1776, 268, 279; 
regarded as a bar to independent action, 285. 

Parliament, resolutions of, relative to abatement in taxes, 193. 

Paper money and taxation of proprietary lands, causes of dispute, 16. 

" Patriotic Society," protest of, 89-91. 

Peddlers, restrictions placed upon, 85. 

Penn family, revenue their primary interest, 16, 18; lack of immigration 

ascribed to the policy of, 20. 
Penn, William, consent of the governed essential to free government 12; objects 



298 Index. 

in founding a colony, 15; efforts to educate the colonists in local self- 
government, 17. 

Petitions, 58, 60, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 82, 84, 95, 112, 155, 194, 195, 197, 
202, 204, 205, 219, 222, 257, 272. 

Philadelphia, city of, the financial centre of the colony, 57; handicapped by the 
freezing of her rivers, 58; trouble with pilots, 59 note; efforts to regain her 
lost trade, 63-72; merchants of, compared with those of Baltimore, 75; 
opposition of middle and lower classes to Quaker control, 77; property 
qualifications for voters, 78, 80. See, also, Committee of the City and Liber- 
ties of Philadelphia. 

Presbyterians, fundamental principles of their religious and political beliefs, 8 ; 
alienated by conduct of aristocracy, 27 ; attitude in Pennsylvania during 
Seven Years' War, 36 ; their opinions of luxuries and city life, 57 > accused 
of inciting to riot, murder and rebellion, 105 note, no note ; accused of 
seeking an alliance with New England Congregationalists, 192. 

Provincial Conference meets, 266 ; takes steps to form a new government for 
Pennsylvania, 267, 268 ; issues address to the people, 269 note ; the logical 
exponent of a transition period, 269. 

Provincial Convention of 1774 meets, 177 ; resolutions presented by, 178, 182 
tiote ; good results growing out of, 185 ; Convention of 1775 called, 187 ; 
powers assumed by, 190. 

Puritans, politics as well as creed, the animating cause of immigration, 8. 

Quakers, control the Assembly, 13 ; will not countenance opposition to Boston Port 
Bill, 168 ; excite the opposition of the Associators, 219 ; attitude regarding 
national independence, 238 ; V Fighting Quakers," 199 note. See also Friends. 

Quaker party, differentiated from Friends, 25 note. 

Races represented among Penn settlers, 141. 

Reed, Joseph, conduct of, in relation to the Boston Port Bill, 156, 160-164; 

moves to new position as required by events, 260. 
Religious tolerance, the forerunner of democratic government, 13. 
Revolution, state and national, compared, 40 ff. 
Rights, of American-born citizens, 87 ; constitutional, as interpreted in America 

and England, 1 14-123. 
Rivers, efforts to improve the navigation of, 70-72. 
Roads, good, want of, in Pennsylvania, 59 ; Philadelphia petitions for, 60 7iote ; 

efforts to establish, 61 ; petitioned for, by Philadelphia merchants, 66; granted, 

but the expense to be borne by the colonists, 67. 
Roberdeau, Daniel, chairman of mass meeting May 20, 1776, 254. 

Sauer, Christopher, furthers Quaker-German alliance, 29. 

Scotch-Irish, fniits of their opposition to the Quakers, 26 ; attitude towards the 
Indians, the Quakers and the Presbyterians, 33 ff ; stupendous consequences 



Index. 299 

of their coming to Pennsylvania, 39 ; sectional jealousies, with dissimilarity 
in religion and trade interests, the motives for joining the Revolutionary 
movement, 53, 76 ; triple contentions as to ownership of Western lands, 98 ; 
retaliatory acts between them and the Indians, 104-113 ; foundation of the 
Whig party, 177 ; verge toward radicalism, 227 ; assume control of the 
colony, 267. 

Sharpe, Granville, political theories of, 117. 

Slave trade, between Maryland and Pennsylvania, 58. 

Smith, William, D. D., "Religion and liberty must flourish or fall together in 
America," 213. 

Smuggling, practiced openly, 124; unsuccessful attempts to suppress, 153. 

Sommers, Lord John, justifies popular revolution, 10. 

Stamp Act and other restrictions on trade arouse resistance to the Crown and 
foster coalition between the colonies, 126-135. 

Suffrage in Philadelphia, qualifications for, under the proprietary government, 45 ; 
under the Constitution of 1776, 267, 268. 

Sugar Act of 1764, 124. 

Taxation without representation the rallying cry, not the cause of the national 

Revolution, 7 ; not the basis of representation in Pennsylvania, 47-5° ; 

without adequate benefit leads to state and national revolution, 54. 
Tea duties, opposition to, 91,93; become the storm centre, 155-159; "Polly 

Ayers" returns to England without discharging her cargo, 159. 
Thomson, Charles, connection with Boston Port Bill, 160-165; radical leader, 

166; chosen secretary to Convention, 177; member of City Committee, 185. 
Townshend Acts, their influence in Pennsylvania, 136-140. 

Vendues, growth of system, 81; regulated by act of Assembly, 82; popular among 
the people, 82; merchants of Philadelphia combine to overthrow, 83; 
Governor vetoes acts against, 84. 

West, growth of sentiment against the East, 23 ff; subordinate to East in Assem- 
bly, 42 ff"; endorses radical movement, 31, 176, 206; imposes its will on the 
East, 287. 

Wharton, Thomas, opinion regarding influence of Virginia and Maryland upon 
Pennsylvania, 155 note; suspected of being a tea consignee, 158; thinks 
Franklin's position in England will be aff"ected by occurrences in Boston, 160 
note; opinions on Revolutionary movement, 175-177; disapproves of attitude 
taken by Convention, 180; condemns the radicals and longs for reconciliation 
with Great Britain, 192. 

Whig party, political theories of, influenced by I^cke, 8; by Dickinson, 38; 
opposed to union of Church and State, 39; acknowledges the authority of 
the Crown, but within certain bounds, 182; approves the first Continental 
Congress, 193; advocates resistance to England, 198, 206, 213; but hesitates 



300 Index. 

to espouse independence, 224; demands reforms from the Assembly, 246; 
successful in the West, 247; desires to retain control, 262; declares for inde- 
pendence, 263; verges toward radicalism, 273. 

Willing, Thomas, elected chairman to Convention, 177. 

Wilson, James, fails of election to Convention, l8l; favors retaining colonial 
charter, 251 ; argues foi delay in declaring for independence, 261. 



L6Je'?9 



JUL. 30 1901 



